Query Syslog

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses return fields (timestamps, levels, sources, messages) and ordering (newest-first). Mentions repeatability. For a read-only query tool, this is sufficient to inform agent behavior.

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?

Two paragraphs are front-loaded with main action. Efficient use of words, no filler. Could be slightly more concise but is well-structured.

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?

For a query tool with 6 params and no output schema, description covers key aspects: what is returned, ordering, and table distinction. Lacks error-handling or empty result behavior, but overall adequate for agent decision-making.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds no additional semantic value beyond what schema descriptions already provide. The example for query parameter is in schema, not description.

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 (Query), resource (syslog), and purpose (check for errors, warnings, debug output). It distinguishes from siblings by being specific to the syslog table, and no other tool in sibling list duplicates this 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?

Explicitly states use cases: monitoring script execution, checking errors after deployments, debugging. Notes repeatability. Distinguishes between syslog and syslog_app_scope tables. Missing explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is strong.

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