Read the Hammerspoon console

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

With readOnlyHint annotation already declaring the safe read-only nature, the description adds context about the content (Lua errors/print output) and the tail behavior ('most recent lines'). However, it doesn't disclose any side effects, error handling, or return format beyond that, so it's adequate but not rich.

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, each serving a distinct purpose: one states the operation, the other provides usage context. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary detail.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and a clear annotation, the description covers the purpose, content, and appropriate use case. It doesn't explain the returned data format, but given the simplicity and lack of output schema, this is not a major 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?

The parameter 'lines' is fully described in the schema ('How many trailing lines to return'), and the description adds no further parameter details. With schema coverage at 100%, the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Return') and the resource ('the Hammerspoon console'), and specifies the scope ('the most recent lines'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining that this is where Lua errors and print output appear, positioning it as a distinct diagnostic tool.

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 offers clear guidance on when to use the tool: 'the first place to look when a config change misbehaves.' While it doesn't explicitly list alternative tools, the context is specific enough to guide an agent toward this tool for console troubleshooting.

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