get_console_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about pagination preventing token limits, which is useful but does not contradict annotations. Lacks disclosure of any additional behavior such as rate limits or return format, but output schema covers return structure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every element serves a purpose: states the action, resource, and key feature (pagination for token limits).

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 presence of a comprehensive input schema (100% coverage) and an output schema, the description adequately summarizes the tool's core purpose. It does not need to explain return values due to the output schema. Slightly missing mention of optional filtering by log type, but this is evident from the schema.

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 only reiterates the token-saving aspect already detailed in parameter descriptions (e.g., limit, includeStackTrace). It adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool retrieves logs from the Unity console with pagination support. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'send_console_log' (sending) and 'watch_console' (real-time monitoring) by focusing on retrieval and pagination, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 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?

The description implies usage when logs are needed and token limits are a concern, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. No prerequisites or context for selection among siblings like 'watch_console' for real-time logs.

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