mac_unified_logs_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool searches logs but does not clarify whether it is read-only, requires special permissions, or has performance implications. The lack of details on side effects or return behavior leaves agents uninformed.

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 wasted words. It front-loads the core action and then lists key features, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and several sibling tools, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not describe the output format (e.g., list of log entries), pagination behavior (limit/offset documented in schema but not in description), or how to interpret results. More context on the tool's return value would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting regex support and listing filter types (subsystem, process, time ranges), which maps to several parameters. However, mentioning 'category' (not in schema) slightly detracts. Overall, it doesn't greatly exceed baseline.

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 'Search macOS Unified Logs with filters' and enumerates specific filter capabilities (regex, subsystem, process, time ranges), making the tool's purpose distinct from sibling tools like mac_unified_logs_security_events or mac_unified_logs_stats. However, it mentions 'category' which is not in the schema, causing slight confusion.

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. It does not mention scenarios where mac_unified_logs_security_events or mac_unified_logs_stats might be more appropriate, nor does it suggest prerequisites or exclusions.

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