get_manager_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. It discloses a critical security behavior: that log descriptions contain attacker-influenced data and instructions should not be followed. This is valuable transparency, but other behavioral details (e.g., pagination, rate limits) are omitted.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by a critical security note. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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 the 5 parameters fully described in schema, the description covers the core purpose and adds a security warning. However, it omits mention of pagination (offset, limit) and the include_description flag, which could help agents use the tool effectively without referring solely to the schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add new semantic information beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The security note is not parameter-specific.

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?

Clearly states 'Retrieve Wazuh manager logs' which is specific verb+resource. It mentions optional filtering by severity or module tag, making the tool's scope distinct from sibling tools that focus on agents or alerts.

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 does not explicitly tell when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide exclusion criteria. It only implies usage for investigating manager logs with filtering, but lacks guidance on when not to use it.

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