get_task_log_tail

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

Discloses automatic secret redaction, default/max line limits (80/200), and the tail-only behavior. Without annotations, the description carries full burden and covers key behavioral traits, but omits details like error handling or performance impact.

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: first conveys purpose and behavior, second gives usage guideline. No redundant words, easy to parse. Front-loaded with key 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 no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and usage. It assumes output is raw text lines, which is reasonable. Lacks explicit mention of return format or error cases, but remains largely complete for a simple read 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates file enum values and default/max for lines, adding some context but not significantly beyond the schema. No additional semantics for task_id or redact beyond defaults mentioned.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Read', the resource 'task log file', and the scope 'last N lines' along with specific log file options (stdout/stderr/test/verify). It also distinguishes from read_workspace_file, making its purpose very clear.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Use this instead of read_workspace_file to avoid triggering platform content filters on log output.' Also implicitly says not to use for full files via 'Always returns tail only — never the full file.'

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