GetScanSessionLog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves logs, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify if it's safe, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral aspects unspecified.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse. However, it could be more structured by including key details like parameter hints, but as a standalone statement, it's 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 the complexity (3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the parameters, behavioral traits, or output format, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively. For a log retrieval tool with pagination parameters, more detail 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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the three parameters (id, skip, limit) are documented in the schema. The description adds no information about these parameters—it doesn't explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., a session ID), what 'skip' and 'limit' control (e.g., pagination), or their expected formats. This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 states the tool's purpose ('Get logs for a SureBackup scan task session'), which is clear but generic. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('logs'), but doesn't distinguish this from similar sibling tools like 'GetSessionLogs' or 'GetTaskSessionLogs', which also retrieve logs. The description is adequate but lacks differentiation.

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. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, context (e.g., after a scan session), or exclusions. With sibling tools like 'GetSessionLogs' and 'GetTaskSessionLogs' present, the absence of comparative usage advice is a significant gap.

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