get_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the log is raw and long, hinting at potentially large output. However, it omits error conditions, behavior when no compile has run, and what maxBytes controls, leaving gaps.

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 the action, and no filler. 'the raw log is long' efficiently justifies the usage constraint and earns its place.

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 tool has 2 parameters and no output schema, but with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description needs to explain parameters and edge-case behavior. It misses what happens before the first compile, maxBytes semantics, and possible error responses, so the description is incomplete.

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%, and the description names no parameters. The optional maxBytes parameter is completely undocumented, and projectId is only implied by context. The description adds zero value beyond the schema, which itself is terse.

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 'Fetch the raw LaTeX log from the last compile' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like compile (which provides diagnostics) and read_file (which reads files generally).

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?

'Use only when compile's structured diagnostics are not enough' explicitly prescribes when to use this tool and points to the alternative (compile). This provides clear decision guidance, similar to the TDQS example that names an alternative.

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