Get Realtime XLogs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining that it returns decoded XLog entries along with loop/index offsets for subsequent polling, clarifying the incremental and paginated nature of the data.

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 three concise sentences that front-load the purpose and provide essential usage details without extraneous information. Every sentence 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?

For a polling tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return format (decoded XLog entries with offsets) and the initial usage pattern. It could mention what happens when no data is available or how to terminate polling, but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the offset usage pattern ('Use offset 0/0 ... pass returned offsets') but adds little beyond what the schema already states about the offset parameters. It does not introduce new semantic details for obj_type or obj_hashes 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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('recent real-time transaction data (XLogs)') with a specific scope ('since given offsets'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_raw_xlog by specifying 'decoded' entries rather than raw, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit usage guidance for the polling pattern: 'Use offset 0/0 for the first call, then pass returned offsets to get newer data.' However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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