Tail Log

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it reads the end of a file or recent journal entries, but does not disclose error handling (e.g., missing file, invalid service) or output format details.

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 that covers the main functionality. It is well-structured and front-loaded, but could be slightly more verbose to include usage notes without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the two modes of operation. It does not mention prerequisites like an open SSH session, but that is implied by the required sessionId parameter. Overall, it is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond paraphrasing 'tail' and 'journal entries', which are already implied by the tool name and schema descriptions.

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 tails a log file or reads recent journal entries for a service. It specifies two distinct use cases, differentiating it from sibling tools like service_logs which may list logs but not tail them.

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 mentions two modes (file path vs. service) but does not explicitly state when to use one over the other or when not to use this tool. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool references are provided.

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