get_container_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explain what 'recent' means, what happens with a non-allowlisted container, whether logs are streamed or returned in a batch, or any limiting behavior. The single sentence provides minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence with no fluff, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately concise and easy to parse.

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, return value details are covered, but the lack of annotations, 0% schema parameter coverage, and a one-line description mean important execution context is missing. For a simple read operation, the description still leaves gaps around parameter semantics, error behavior, and usage prerequisites.

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, but it does not. Neither the 'container' parameter nor the 'lines' parameter is explained. The description only mentions 'recent logs', which does not clarify that 'lines' controls the number of lines returned, nor how the container identifier should be specified.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and clearly identifies the resource ('recent logs for an allowlisted Docker container'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_system_health or list_containers, and the 'allowlisted' qualifier adds useful scoping.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites beyond the implicit 'allowlisted' status. There is no mention of using list_containers first to find a container name or of error conditions for non-allowlisted containers.

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