ops_audit_tail

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful traits: records are 'redacted' (privacy masking) and 'hash-chained' (tamper-evident/immutable), and 'Read' implies read-only. It omits auth requirements, ordering, pagination, and what happens at the tail boundary.

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 with zero waste. Every word (redacted, hash-chained, recent) carries signal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with no annotations and an undocumented parameter, the description is thin for a tool whose 'limit' and tailing semantics are entirely unstated.

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 single 'limit' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate and does not. 'Recent' hints that a cap exists but gives no meaning, default, or bounds for 'limit'.

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 (Read) and resource (audit records) with distinguishing qualifiers (recent, redacted, hash-chained). This clearly separates it from siblings like ops_list_hosts or ops_run_command, though it does not name an alternative explicitly.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is provided. 'Recent' weakly implies a tailing/monitoring use case, but the agent is left to infer everything about selection.

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