Read router log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no further behavioral context such as default output volume, truncation behavior, or whether the log is a fixed ring buffer and how far back it reaches.

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 tight sentences with the capability stated first and the sibling routing second; no filler and nothing an agent doesn't need for selection.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter log reader with full schema coverage and annotation-declared safety, this is close to sufficient. The remaining gap is that the description never contrasts with dump_log, a directly related sibling an agent may reasonably hesitate between.

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, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema lacks by enumerating accepted time formats for since/until ('HH:MM', 'HH:MM:SS', 'Jul 24 08:00'). It does not similarly elaborate on 'lines' or 'filter', which is a minor omission.

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 ('Get system log entries') plus the notable property that entries carry timestamps. It also names the sibling that handles device-scoped lines, so an agent can distinguish get_log from get_log_by_device 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 device-specific case to get_log_by_device ('For lines about one device (by MAC, IP or name)...'), which is a real when-to-use rule. It does not address the other log-related sibling, dump_log, leaving one plausible alternative unexplained.

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