stape_get_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, and the purpose hints at debugging. However, it does not disclose behaviors like pagination, log retention limits, or error conditions, leaving the agent with incomplete expectations.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and purpose. Every word adds value, with no repetition or fluff.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description should provide some expectation of what logs contain. While the schema explains the 'type' parameter (detailed vs aggregated), the description does not elaborate on the return format. However, the purpose and tool name make it reasonably clear what the logs represent, and the schema covers the main options, so the context is mostly complete.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameters with rich descriptions (e.g., 'detailed' vs 'aggregated', default values). The description adds no additional parameter-specific context, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a clear resource ('outgoing request logs for a container'), which is distinct from sibling tools that manage containers, domains, or powerups. It also adds the purpose ('to debug tracking tags and vendor integrations'), making the tool's role 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?

The description clearly implies when to use this tool: for debugging tracking tags and vendor integrations. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, so it falls short of a full 5.

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