get_container_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'recent' scoping, which is useful, but it does not disclose whether logs are tailed, how container identification works, or the output format. With annotations carrying much of the burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient and front-loaded, though slightly under-specified; the conciseness itself is a strength.

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 read-only log retrieval with annotations covering safety, this is nearly adequate. However, the lack of any parameter semantics and the absence of an output schema leave the agent to infer how to specify the container and the line count. It is a minimum-viable definition with clear gaps.

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 description must compensate for the two parameters. It only loosely maps to the 'lines' parameter with 'Recent logs' and says nothing about 'name_or_id'. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description provides no concrete semantics for either parameter.

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 resource ('logs from a Docker container') and scopes it to 'recent' logs. Although it lacks an explicit verb, the tool name supplies the action, and specifying 'Docker container' differentiates it from the sibling get_logs.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_logs or get_container_status. The description only states what the tool returns and does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or selection conditions.

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