Tail logs

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by clarifying that the result is a bounded snapshot rather than a live stream, which is genuinely useful beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary usage scenario is front-loaded, and the live-stream clarification adds important information without bloating the text.

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 plus schema and annotations cover the essential invocation context for a read-only log retrieval tool. It could be slightly more complete by stating what the returned snapshot looks like, but the bounded-snapshot phrase largely covers that expectation.

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 50%, and the description does not go into parameter-level details. It gives context about 'service' and 'build' but leaves limit, project, and service semantics mostly to the schema or obvious naming, so the added value here is moderate.

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 clearly states the tool's action: see recent log output from a Lizard service or a specific build. It also differentiates the behavior by noting it returns a bounded snapshot, not a live stream, which distinguishes it from a typical 'tail' tool.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants to see recent log output', which provides clear context for when to invoke it. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion cases, but the intended scenario is unambiguous.

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