search_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Search' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation and the 'recent time window' phrase hints at the default lookback, which is useful. However, it omits permissions/auth requirements, rate limits, and result/pagination behavior (e.g., how limit interacts with results).

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a compact routing hint. No filler or redundancy.

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 4-parameter, 2-required read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the what and a rough when, but leaves behavioral gaps: no return shape, no pagination/limit interaction, no auth caveats. Adequate but not fully complete given the disclosure burden.

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 every parameter is already documented with type, default, and meaning in the schema. The description adds only the loose notion of a 'recent time window,' which does not extend the since_minutes or limit semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Search a CloudWatch log group for a text pattern within a recent time window.' It is clearly distinguishable from list_log_groups and get_active_alarms by naming the CloudWatch log group and pattern-search action. No sibling is named explicitly, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Adds a usage context: 'quick root-cause triage across the platform's services.' This implies when to reach for it, but gives no when-not guidance, prerequisites, or explicit routing against list_log_groups or get_active_alarms. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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