get_server_logs

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

No annotations are provided, placing the full burden on the description. It only states the basic action (fetch logs) and a qualifier ('recent'), without disclosing behavioral details such as whether logs are truncated, whether the server must be actively running, or how errors are handled.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain the return format or error states. While the tool is simple, the omission of response structure (e.g., array of log lines) and error conditions makes it less complete for an agent to anticipate the outcome.

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?

The input schema covers all parameters (100% coverage) with clear descriptions for 'port' and 'lines'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for this dimension.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch'), resource ('logs for a running server'), and qualifier ('recent' and 'by port'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like server_status or server_metrics, which serve different purposes.

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives. However, the tool is the only log-fetching tool among siblings, so confusion is minimal. The implication that the server must be running is present but not elaborated.

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