getPipelineStepLogs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden; the verb 'Get' and 'stdout/stderr logs' imply a read-only retrieval of step output. However, it does not disclose whether logs can be paginated or truncated, whether the step must be completed, or any permissions, so transparency is adequate but not rich.

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?

One short sentence conveys the action, subject, and target scope with no filler or redundancy. The key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple getter, the description plus schema is enough to know what to call, but there is no output schema and no mention of response format, pagination, or optional parameter roles. The required IDs are defined, so it is minimally complete rather than fully self-contained.

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 schema documents the two required parameters (pipeline_uuid, step_uuid), and the description maps them to 'logs from a specific pipeline step.' However, the optional repo_slug and workspace parameters are undocumented in both the schema and the description, and the description adds no extra meaning for them, so parameter semantics are only adequate.

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 uses a specific action ('Get') and a specific resource ('stdout/stderr logs from a specific pipeline step'), which clearly distinguishes it from pipeline run and PR sibling tools. Even without a title, an agent can identify exactly what this tool returns.

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 'from a specific pipeline step' wording gives clear retrieval context: use when you have a pipeline run and step and need logs for that step. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool returns step logs, so the selection context is clear enough.

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