get_last_log

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context: the log is 'full raw' (not triaged), it's from the 'most recent submit', and it warns that logs 'consume a lot of context' — a useful cost signal beyond the annotations. It does not describe output format, but that is covered by the output schema.

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 with zero waste. The primary action is front-loaded, and the advisory note is concise. Every word 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 is simple (two optional parameters), and an output schema exists, but the complete lack of parameter guidance is a notable gap. The description clearly states purpose, usage, and cost, so the agent can decide when to call it, but may not know how to tailor calls (e.g., max_lines) without additional information.

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%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description does not mention 'from_end' or 'max_lines' at all, leaving the agent to guess their meaning. While the names are somewhat self-explanatory, the tool description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return the full raw SAS log from the most recent submit.' It clearly distinguishes itself from run_sas by contrasting the raw log with the 'triaged output' from run_sas, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 states when to use this tool: 'Use only when the triaged output from run_sas was not enough to diagnose the problem.' It also gives a reason (logs consume a lot of context), which helps the agent avoid unnecessary calls. This directly addresses usage guidance.

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