List Logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists logs and returns specific fields, and mentions pagination. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or disclose any behavioral traits like rate limits or data retention. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 well-structured with headings and bullet points. It is concise, with each sentence adding value. The purpose is front-loaded. Minor redundancy in explaining pagination could be trimmed, but overall it is effective.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, return fields, and usage scenarios. It lacks details on authentication or rate limits, but for a list operation, it is fairly complete. The sibling tools list is extensive, but this tool's description provides sufficient context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for its three parameters (after, limit, before). The description adds context about pagination usage but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema fields already convey. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it lists API request logs for the account, specifying the verb 'list' and resource 'API request logs'. It also adds purpose: review activity, debug, audit. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools which cover different resources.

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 includes a 'When to use' section with explicit scenarios like reviewing recent API activity, debugging, and checking request history. It provides clear context for when to invoke this tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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