Get Docker Logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'get logs' without disclosing any behavioral details such as output format, pagination, or prerequisites beyond the required parameters. It does not contradict any annotations.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the essential information. It is efficient but under-specified; however, for what it says, every word earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what logs are returned (e.g., container logs, build logs) or any filtering options, leaving users with incomplete expectations for a log retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (vm_id and project_name) at 100% coverage, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds minimal context by referring to the project but doesn't elaborate on parameter values or format.

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 the action (get) and the resource (logs of a Docker project), aligning with the tool name and title. It distinguishes from other Docker tools like vps_docker_containers and vps_docker_get, but lacks specifics on log scope or 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of other Docker tools. There are no alternatives, exclusions, or contextual hints to help an agent choose this tool.

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