hostodo_read_vm_command_logs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that reads are incremental and offset-based, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not clarify whether the command must have finished, whether offsets are validated, or if there are rate limits or side effects. More detail would improve transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose ('Read incremental stdout/stderr chunks') followed by a concise usage hint. Every sentence is necessary and no information is redundant. Excellent structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple and the description covers the key iterative usage pattern. However, it does not mention potential edge cases like empty chunks when no new output is available, or whether the command must be completed. Given no output schema, a bit more detail on what is returned would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the incremental reading model and offset resumption, but the parameter descriptions in the schema already define the offsets and max_bytes. The description does not introduce new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it reads incremental stdout/stderr chunks by offset, distinguishing it from a full output fetch. It uses specific verbs ('read', 'resume') and identifies the resource (async command logs). This differentiates it from sibling tools like hostodo_get_vm_command_output which likely returns full output.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly tells users to use offsets from previous calls to resume reading, providing clear iterative usage guidance. It does not, however, discuss when not to use this tool (e.g., for initial or full output reads) or explicitly mention alternatives like hostodo_get_vm_command_output.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.