getJobLogContent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered; the description adds real value by disclosing that logs are plain text and that fetching early can yield an incomplete log. It does not mention auth needs, log size, or rate limits, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three sentences, each doing distinct work: what it returns, when it is safe to call, and which sibling to use instead. The precondition is front-loaded before the alternative routing.

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?

With no output schema, the description conveys the return format (plain-text log) and the terminal-state precondition, which is enough to invoke correctly. It stops short of describing log size, pagination, or truncation behavior for large logs.

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% and the schema already explains that jobId comes from a `jobs` resource and is used to poll getJob, so the description's restatement of jobId's origin is largely redundant. The response_format parameter is not addressed at all in the description, leaving the schema to carry it.

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?

States a specific verb (downloads) plus the exact resource (plain-text execution log) and narrows scope to one asynchronous Polarion job. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling getJobResultFileContent, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition (call after getJob reports a terminal state), explains why (a running job may have an incomplete log), and names the alternative tool for produced files. Nothing about when-to-use or when-not-to-use is left to inference.

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