deployado_get_build_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral content: what the output contains (Dockerfile parsing errors, dependency install, compilation output) and that partial logs are returned mid-build. It does not address log size limits, truncation, or pagination, which matters for a log-fetch tool.

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?

Front-loaded purpose followed by return contents and a clearly flagged distinction; every paragraph has a function. Minor redundancy in restating the build-vs-runtime split twice.

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 takes on describing the return value and does so adequately, plus covers the partial-log case. It stops short of noting size limits or what an empty/failed-to-fetch response looks like.

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 both parameters are documented in-schema, including where release_id comes from. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ("Fetch build logs for a specific release") and immediately scopes it against the sibling deployado_get_logs. An agent can distinguish build logs from runtime logs without opening the 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 use case ("diagnose why a build failed") and an explicit exclusion with the named alternative ("For runtime logs of a running app, use deployado_get_logs instead"). The in-progress case is also covered.

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