get_build_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without mentioning side effects, read-only status, return format, or any performance considerations. While 'Get' implies a read operation, the description does not explicitly confirm safety or add context beyond the function name.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of six words. It states the verb, resource, and scope with zero wasted words, making it appropriately concise for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 getter with one well-documented parameter, the description is mostly adequate, but it lacks a distinction from the sibling get_deployment_logs. Since there is no output schema, the description does not clarify what the response contains or how it differs from deployment logs, creating possible ambiguity.

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% (deploymentId described as 'The deployment ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal meaning by tying the deployment ID to the retrieval of build logs, but it does not elaborate on format, constraints, or required context beyond what the schema already states.

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 'Get build logs for a deployment' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool retrieves build logs tied to a deployment. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_deployment_logs by specifying 'build logs' rather than general deployment logs.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, particularly the similarly named get_deployment_logs. There is no mention of when build logs are needed or how they differ from deployment logs, leaving the agent without decision support.

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