find_sys_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the search action and use case, omitting read-only nature, potential rate limits, or result format. Basic, but insufficient for a fully informed selection.

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?

Two sentences: first defines the action and filters, second provides usage context. Highly concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundancy.

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 no output schema and moderate parameter count, the description provides adequate context for a simple search tool. However, it lacks details on output format (e.g., fields returned), pagination, or performance implications, which are common for debugging 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 description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 params have descriptions). The description echoes 'by keyword, source, or level' but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The limit parameter is not mentioned in the description, relying solely on schema default.

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?

Clearly states the verb (Search), resource (ServiceNow system logs/syslog table), and filtering dimensions (by keyword, source, or level). Sibling differentiation is implicit but not explicit.

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?

The description mentions 'Useful for debugging Business Rules, integrations, and scheduled jobs', giving context. However, it does not specify when NOT to use this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., for full table scans).

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