Search Logs

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two useful behaviors: results are exact matching lines rather than a full dump, and the result set is capped (default limit 50, max 200). It says nothing about auth/connection selection, pagination behavior, or what happens with long ranges, so the disclosure is partial.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the key scoping phrase and then the filter dimensions and limits. No filler, though it stops short of being maximally informative for a tool of this size.

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 35-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, three sentences are inadequate. Pagination, sorting, sampling, long-range caps, connection selection, and the distinction from the many log siblings are all left unaddressed.

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 57% across 35 parameters, so the schema documents only part of the surface. The description names the main filter families and adds the default limit value (50), which the schema lacks, but it says nothing about the contains/containsAll/containsAny/notContains distinction, sample, sort, offset, allowLongRange, caseInsensitive, or maxContentChars.

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 action on a specific resource – filtering log lines by cluster/namespace/pod/container, loglevel, contains/regex, trace id and date bounds. The parenthetical '(not a dump)' hints it is distinct from dump-style log tools, but it never names which sibling to use for full-stream or summarization needs, so sibling differentiation is weak.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and the large family of log siblings (dynatrace_log_summary, dynatrace_pod_logs, dynatrace_logs_tail, dynatrace_logs_surrounding, dynatrace_logs_wait) is never referenced. Usage is only weakly implied by the filter list.

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