pi_console_log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds 'captured' and 'tail', indicating a stored, truncated snapshot rather than live output. It doesn't disclose edge cases like invalid job_id or default line count, but this is acceptable given 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scope, no filler. 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?

For a simple read-only tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description tells the agent what it returns (tail of console output) and how to select the job. Minor omissions like default line count and behavior with no job are low-risk and partially covered by the schema's min/max constraints.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the burden. It maps 'lines' to the tail length and 'job_id' to the 'given job' selection, but doesn't explicitly document defaults, optionality, or the 1–2000 range. The parameter names plus this context make the tool usable, but the description adds only partial parameter meaning.

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?

Description clearly identifies the resource (PixInsight console output) and scope (most recent or given job), with 'Tail' indicating a truncated read. It is not a tautology and can be distinguished from job_log/job_status by its focus on console output, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It implies usage when you need the tail of console output for a job, and clarifies the job selection ('most recent or given'). However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like job_log or pi_status.

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