search_logs_by_location

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only search operation, but there is no mention of what the output contains, whether results are paginated or limited, or any side effects or required permissions. The description adds minimal behavioral insight beyond the action itself.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified, lacking necessary context and behavioral details. It earns a middle score because it is efficient but incomplete for a tool with 6 parameters and a search function.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and only a one-sentence description. It does not provide usage context, alternatives, or behavior beyond the basic action. The existence of an output schema helps, but the description itself is insufficient for an agent to understand when and how to invoke this tool correctly.

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%, meaning the parameters have no explanatory descriptions. The tool description does not compensate by explaining what parameters like lat_min, lon_max, limit, or time_range mean or how they interact. The parameter names are self-explanatory to an extent, but the description provides no added semantic value.

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 searches OCI Load Balancer logs within geographic bounds, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_logs_by_country and search_logs_by_ip by the geographic bounds concept, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. This is clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention how 'search_logs_by_country' or 'search_logs_by_ip' might be more appropriate for certain scenarios, nor does it suggest prerequisites or typical use cases. There is no explicit exclusion or when-to-use guidance.

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