get_system_log

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does add useful behavioral context: 'Defaults to past 7 days' and 'v2 API'. However, it does not disclose other behaviors such as ordering of results, inclusivity of timestamps, or handling of null parameters, which would be valuable for a log retrieval tool.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place with no filler. It is highly readable and efficiently communicates the tool's essence.

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?

The tool is simple, and the schema covers all five parameters with good descriptions, while the output schema presumably documents return values. However, the description does not help an agent choose among overlapping siblings like list_events or list_alarms, nor does it clarify the nature of 'system log' vs. other event types. It is adequate but has clear gaps in 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying that omitting start/end defaults to the past 7 days, which is not stated in the parameter descriptions. This provides meaningful semantic context for the time-range parameters.

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 tool's function: 'Fetch system log entries (v2 API)'. It uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('system log entries'), making the primary purpose unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like list_events or list_alarms, which might overlap in function.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only usage hint is 'Defaults to past 7 days', which implies a default time range but does not explain when this tool is preferred over list_events or list_alarms. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are provided.

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