get_container_logs

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe non-mutating read, and the description is consistent with that. It adds the useful scope detail that output comes from stdout/stderr and is 'recent' only, but says nothing about behavior on stopped containers, truncation at the 1000-line cap, or error cases.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming verb, resource, and source stream, with zero filler. Nothing could be cut without losing 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?

For a simple 3-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, the description covers the essentials. It is thin on operational context (container state requirements, output format tied to timestamps) that would let an agent call it confidently the first time.

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 lines, timestamps, and container_id are already fully documented with defaults and bounds. The description's only added signal is 'recent', which loosely reinforces the lines default rather than extending parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('log lines from a container's stdout/stderr'), which clearly separates it from get_container (metadata) and list_containers. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling to contrast with, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus get_container or list_containers, nor any prerequisites (e.g. container must exist/running). The word 'recent' weakly implies a tail-style read, but the agent must infer the use case entirely.

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