List Activity Logs

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

The description 'List activity logs' is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true), indicating a safe, read-only operation. However, it does not add behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide, such as potential rate limits or result size considerations.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with an additional short clause. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word serves a purpose. No unnecessary information.

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 the existence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the basic functionality (listing, filtering, pagination). However, it could briefly distinguish company-level logs from environment logs to fully orient the agent, missing a small contextual cue.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter's meaning is already documented. The description mentions 'filtering and pagination' which aligns with parameters like limit, offset, and category, but does not add new semantics beyond the schema.

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 'List activity logs for your Kinsta company' clearly specifies the action (list) and resource (activity logs at the company level). It distinguishes from sibling tools like kinsta.logs.get (environment-specific logs) and other list tools by focusing on company-wide activity logs.

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 versus alternatives or when filtering/pagination should be applied. The description lacks explicit usage context, leaving the AI agent without decision-support for tool selection.

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