deployment_logs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, pagination, or authentication requirements. For a simple log retrieval, basic transparency is sufficient but could be improved by noting that logs are for deployment builds, not runtime.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points for best uses, not-for, prerequisites, next steps, and related tools. Every sentence adds value, and it is very concise.

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, the description could explain the content or format of logs, but it does not. However, it provides context about usage and related tools, and the tool is simple. Almost complete for its complexity.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (deploymentId and limit). The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get logs for a specific deployment' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like service_info (runtime logs) and deployment_trigger (triggering deployment).

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?

Explicitly lists use cases (debugging, monitoring, checking build output) and non-use cases (service runtime logs, database logs). Also mentions prerequisite (deployment_list) and next step (deployment_status), providing clear context for when to use this tool.

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