Ler logs do PJe-Calc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the log location and the filtering behavior of somente_erros, but says nothing about rotation, file count, encoding, or how the raw lines are returned.

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 compact sentences with the resource identified first and the practical trigger in the second. No padding or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

With annotations covering safety and no output schema required, the definition tells the agent where the logs live and when to apply the error filter — enough to call it correctly. It could still note the default volume of lines returned per file.

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 100%, so all three parameters (linhas, arquivo, somente_erros) are documented in the schema, including the default of 60 and the 500 maximum. The description only restates the meaning of somente_erros, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: reading the last lines of the Tomcat/MCP logs under tomcat/logs. It is unmistakably the only log-reading tool among the siblings, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with any of them.

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?

It names a concrete trigger: when an operation returns "Erro Interno no Servidor", use somente_erros=true to see only exceptions and GRAVE lines. No alternative tool or exclusion is mentioned, but the when-to-use context is clear.

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