get_logbook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses default behavior (7 days, 50 limit) but omits explicit statements about being read-only, idempotent, or any side effects. Sufficient for simple read operation.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loaded with purpose, followed by two-line parameter breakdown. Every sentence is necessary and informative with no redundancies.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and parameters. Lacks explanation of what 'Logbook' is (e.g., a history of completed items), but this is minor given sibling 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description adds vital meaning: explains period format (e.g., '3d', '1w', '2m', '1y') and limits default. However, no additional constraints on limit (e.g., maximum) or explanation of period units beyond examples.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'completed todos from Logbook', with a default scope of last 7 days. Unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like get_todos (all todos) or get_recent (recently modified).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies usage for retrieving completed tasks over a period, but does not exclude alternatives or provide context like when to prefer get_todos or get_recent.

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