spidra_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so the description correctly focuses on behavior beyond safety: newest-first ordering, inclusion of dashboard-created runs, and the retention advantage over job records. It doesn't cover anything about result paging throughput or staleness, but the important behavioral traits are disclosed.

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?

One front-loaded sentence establishes purpose and ordering, then compact bullets keyed to each parameter. Every sentence carries distinct information; nothing restates the schema verbatim.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does tell the agent that opening an id returns the full log 'with its result'. Combined with pagination and status semantics, that is enough to call it correctly, though a sentence on the list-mode return shape would close the last gap.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema cannot: for 'id', scrape/search/map take the log's uuid while crawl/template take the job's id. It also enumerates the status values per tool, which the schema explicitly defers to the description for.

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 ('Find past runs, newest first, or open one by its id') and immediately distinguishes the two modes. It also names the boundary against spidra_get_job, so an agent can tell it apart from the job-status sibling without opening either schema.

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 routes the agent: use this to list runs or open one log by id, but for parse logs use spidra_get_job (type "parse") and for batch use spidra_get_job (type "batch"). It also notes filtering only applies to scrape/search/map/parse, which tells the agent when the status/searchTerm parameters are useless.

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