log_stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions live streaming for a duration but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or destructive, how connections are managed, or what happens on timeout or errors.

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 communicates the core functionality efficiently. It is front-loaded with the main action (stream live logs) and duration constraint.

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 the parameter count (4) and lack of output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the tool's purpose and key constraint (duration) but lacks details on expected output format, error scenarios, or connection lifecycle.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, such as how 'timeout' relates to 'streaming' or the purpose of 'predicate'.

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 streams live logs from a simulator for a specified duration, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'log_collect' and 'physical_device_console'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from these sibling tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'log_collect' or 'physical_device_console'. It does not mention any prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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