get_function_run_logs

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic purpose, but doesn't mention that it's a read-only operation, any potential side effects, ordering, pagination, or limits. The lack of detail leaves the agent uninformed about important behavioral characteristics.

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 front-loads the purpose. It is concise and to the point, though it could potentially include more detail without being verbose.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is somewhat complete but lacks details on return format, ordering, or behavior when no logs exist. It adequately states the core purpose but leaves gaps for an agent.

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% with all parameters described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided, so this score is appropriate.

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 'Fetch logs correlated to one durable function run' uses a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('logs for one durable function run'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_function_logs' (likely for general function logs) and 'list_function_runs' (listing runs, not logs).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, restrictions, or exclusions. Among siblings like 'get_function_logs' and 'list_function_runs', there is no differentiation.

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