query_pod_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that logs are sanitized with PII/secrets redacted and implies a read-only query operation. It does not describe behavior for regex matching multiple pods, empty results, or error conditions.

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 compact and well-structured: an opening behavioral summary followed by a focused Args list. Every line adds useful information beyond the raw schema, and the format is easy for an agent to parse.

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?

The description covers the tool's core purpose, redaction behavior, and all parameter semantics, and an output schema exists for return values. It is less complete on sibling differentiation and edge-case behavior, so an agent may need to infer when to use this tool versus similar log-related siblings.

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 0%, but the description documents all five parameters with examples, constraints, and semantics that the schema lacks, such as regex patterns, timeout range, and limit bounds. This fully compensates for the missing 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 states a specific action and resource: query logs from a Kubernetes pod, with sanitized output. It is clear and not tautological, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like query_logs_custom.

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 tool's scope as a Kubernetes pod log query is implied by the description and parameter list. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as query_logs_custom, analyze_logs, or get_k8s_events.

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