get_logs

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint by disclosing the log's origin (file since extension start), the default verbosity floor ('Info and above'), and the non-obvious prerequisite that verbose lines require Kit to be launched with --/log/level=verbose and --/log/fileLogLevel=verbose. Only the return shape/pagination is left unstated, which the output schema covers.

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 with the action and scope, then the usage trigger, then the verbosity caveat — a logical progression where every sentence carries information. Slightly longer than strictly necessary, but nothing is filler.

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?

Covers purpose, trigger, and the one genuinely surprising behavior (verbose logging requires startup flags). With an output schema and full parameter coverage plus safety annotations, the only omission is how much history is guaranteed versus the 2000-entry buffer, which the schema already hints at.

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%, so count, search, channel, and min_level are already fully documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds a little context by explaining what the log contains by default, which indirectly informs min_level usage, but it does not explain parameter interaction or filtering precedence.

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 (get recent entries of the Kit app's log) and pins down the scope further: read from the log file since the bridge extension started. No sibling tool does anything similar, so the agent can immediately tell this is the diagnostics/log surface.

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 trigger condition: 'when any tool fails, call get_logs() to see what the Kit app reported.' That is precisely the when-to-use guidance an agent needs, and there is no competing alternative to route away from.

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