Retrieve workflow logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds only the raw endpoint and tag, without disclosing pagination behavior, auth requirements, or what the logs contain beyond the annotated read-only nature.

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 brief, but the first line simply repeats the title ('Retrieve workflow logs') before restating it as 'Retrieve logs of a workflows runs by ID', which is redundant rather than front-loaded information.

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 retrieval tool, the annotations carry the safety profile and the schema fully documents the filters. However, no output schema exists and the description says nothing about the shape or volume of returned logs or pagination, leaving a modest gap.

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 all four parameters (id, limit, before, result) are already documented in the schema, including the enum for result. The description adds no syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema supplies, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieve logs of a workflow's runs by ID'), and the endpoint line (GET /workflows/{id}/logs) confirms the operation. It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling immich_get_workflow by specifying that it returns run logs, but never names or contrasts any sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus immich_get_workflow, immich_get_workflow_triggers, or immich_search_workflows. Usage is only inferable from the tool name and title, with no conditions or exclusions stated.

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