pbs_node_journal

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

The description labels the tool as 'READ-ONLY,' indicating no destructive side effects. It clarifies that since/until parameters must be UNIX-epoch integers, not free-text, which is a behavioral detail beyond annotations. The return type is stated as 'a list of journal-line strings.' Given no annotations, this provides sufficient transparency.

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 concise with five short, informative sentences. It front-loads the purpose and read-only nature, then addresses parameter nuance, alternative tools, and requirements without redundancy.

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 tool has 7 parameters (none required) and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, return type, key parameter caveats, an alternative, and a prerequisite. The output schema handles return value details, so no further elaboration is needed.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by emphasizing the integer format for since/until and contrasting it with the free-text form used by the syslog endpoint, which aids correct parameter usage beyond the schema descriptions.

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 starts with 'READ-ONLY: fetch systemd journal lines from a PBS node,' clearly stating the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling pbs_node_syslog by noting the free-text date-time-string form belongs to syslog, not this tool.

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 explicitly recommends using pbs_node_syslog for the classic syslog view, providing a clear alternative. It also states the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config,' though it does not elaborate on when to avoid using this tool beyond the syslog comparison.

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