get_script_log_output

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the operation as retrieving output, which is non-destructive. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, or error conditions, but the behavior is straightforward and adequately disclosed for a 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?

The description is concise and well-structured, starting with a clear purpose followed by an Args/Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and there is 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 that an output schema exists (per context signals), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers parameter semantics thoroughly and includes helpful derivation logic for log_id. It could mention potential errors or prerequisites, but is otherwise complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains the purpose of each parameter: adom (ADOM name), log_id (derivation from task_id), and device (optional but required for device-specific logs). This adds significant meaning beyond the input schema.

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 states 'Get specific script execution output by log ID', which is a clear verb+resource+method. It implies differentiation from sibling tools like get_script_log_latest and get_script_log_summary through the focus on a specific log ID, but does not explicitly distinguish them.

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 provides context for when to use the tool (to get output by log ID) and includes derivation of log_id from task_id. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_script_log_latest or get_script_log_summary.

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