get_server_logs

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 of behavioral disclosure. However, it lacks mention of important side effects such as the default clearing of the log buffer (seen in the 'clear' parameter defaulting to true). The description only says 'Read', which is misleading because the tool also modifies state by clearing logs. No permissions, rate limits, or other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 a single sentence of 9 words, containing zero wasted words. It is front-loaded and concise, directly stating the core function.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a string, array of lines, or structured object). For a log-reading tool, the return format is crucial for the agent to process the result. Additionally, no error behavior or edge cases are mentioned. The description is insufficient for full autonomous use.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but does not improve understanding. The baseline of 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 the verb 'Read' and the resource 'stdout/stderr output from a managed server process'. It distinctly identifies the purpose and differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_console_logs' (browser console) and 'list_servers' (listing servers).

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 implies usage after starting a server via the reference to 'server identifier passed to start_server', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or when not to use it. The context is implied but not explicit.

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