get_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool reads (non-destructive) and that logs are 'captured from connected sessions,' implying a session must be connected. It also hints at pagination behavior via `since`. However, it does not mention any side effects, rate limits, or data volume considerations.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second adds a concrete usage tip. Every word contributes.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too sparse. It does not explain the return format, the meaning of the filter parameters, or any prerequisites beyond connected sessions. An agent would need to infer or experiment to use it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only explains `since` ('use with the last seq to page'). The remaining parameters (level, limit, target, contains) are left entirely undocumented, leaving an agent to guess their types and purposes.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Read Studio Output (LogService) captured from connected sessions.' This clearly identifies the tool's function as retrieving logs. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the resource is distinct enough.

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 a specific pagination instruction: 'Use `since` with the last seq to page.' This gives practical guidance for one parameter. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like studio_status or get_tree, nor any exclusions.

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