snaphost_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination state via 'next_since', which is useful, but it doesn't mention whether logs are append-only, whether older logs get truncated, timeouts for log availability after deploy, or rate limits. For a read-only log-fetching tool, the disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 two compact sentences with zero waste, front-loading the core purpose first and immediately following with the critical pagination usage detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the purpose, the required identifier, and the paging mechanism. It could optionally clarify return format or log ordering, but given the low complexity and small parameter count, this is largely sufficient.

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 50% (deploy_id is described only by its format; since has a description). The description adds the pagination relationship between 'since' and 'next_since' that the schema doesn't capture, which is valuable. However, deploy_id's semantics (which deploy's logs) are implied by the description but not enriched beyond the schema.

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 it fetches 'build/runtime logs for a Snaphost deploy' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the use case (logs retrieval) from siblings which handle deploy/delete/status/list operations, though the scope of what logs contain and the distinction from status is implicit rather than explicit.

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 provides clear context for the 'since/next_since' pagination pattern ('Pass next_since from a previous call to page'), which guides sequential usage. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like snaphost_status, though the log-fetching purpose is reasonably self-evident.

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