log_memory_setting_get

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, important behavioral traits are omitted. The tool is likely read-only, but this is not explicitly stated, and there is no mention of permission requirements or side effects.

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 that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. It is appropriately concise, though it could include more context without becoming verbose.

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 and comprehensive parameter documentation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not hint at the output structure or confirm that no destructive actions occur, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 documents the vdom parameter effectively. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 'Get the memory logging settings' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings that target other logging settings (e.g., disk, FortiAnalyzer).

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 like log_disk_setting_get or log_fortianalyzer_setting_get. The description does not specify prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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