get_execution_transcript

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

No annotations provided. Description only states purpose; does not disclose behavior (e.g., read-only, required permissions, error cases). Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence with emoji; concise and front-loaded. Japanese may reduce clarity for some agents, but structure is efficient.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is adequate but does not explain return values or how it differs from similar tools.

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%; parameter description already explains script_id. Description adds no further semantic value beyond 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 uses a verb (取得/get) and resource (実行ログ・デバッグ情報) indicating retrieval of execution logs. It is mostly clear but lacks English and does not distinguish from sibling tools like diagnostic_info.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as debug_web_app or diagnose_script_issues. Agent has no context for selection.

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