vibecloud_app_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only, caps output at 500 lines, and warns that logs may contain secrets and should not be publicly exposed. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond bare schema information.

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 short but not well-structured: the core purpose ('Read deployment logs') appears at the end, and the bilingual phrasing adds redundancy. Deployment timing and the secret warning are useful, but the main action should be front-loaded for faster agent comprehension.

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?

The description gives enough for a basic understanding: it is an alias, reads deployment logs, has a 500-line cap, and warns about secrets. However, with no output schema, it does not describe what the returned log data looks like, nor does it clarify the deployment parameter or what happens when deployment is omitted.

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 low at 33%, and the description does not compensate by explaining app_id or deployment. Only sandbox has a schema description. The text mentions deployment logs but does not clarify what the deployment parameter means or how it relates to app_id.

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 tool reads deployment logs and explicitly identifies itself as a compatibility alias of cloud_app_logs. It names the resource (app logs) and the action (read), but does not differentiate from cloud_app_logs since it is an alias.

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 alias relationship implies it can be used in place of cloud_app_logs, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The deployment timing note ('first app host ~2–3 minutes, deploy 10–20 seconds') provides useful context for when logs might be available, but no alternative selection criteria are given.

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