get_system_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not repeat safety. It adds useful context such as 'recent' logs, PanOS log API type=log, filtering, and count limiting. However, it does not disclose details like pagination, log entry structure, or any rate-limiting behavior.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with the READ-ONLY marker first, followed by the core action and key capabilities. There is no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter tool with a fully documented schema, the description provides sufficient operational context: source, API type, recency, filtering, and count limiting. It does not describe return format, but no output schema exists and this is a simple log retrieval tool, so the core context is adequately covered.

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%, so the schema already documents nlogs, query, and firewall with descriptions. The description adds only a general mention of 'filtering by query and limiting result count,' which maps to the schema but does not add deeper semantic meaning beyond it.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves recent system logs from the firewall using the PanOS log API (type=log).' It also mentions filtering and result count limiting. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling log tools like get_traffic_logs, though the resource name 'system logs' provides implicit differentiation.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving system logs and has filtering capabilities, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over get_traffic_logs, get_threat_logs, get_config_logs, or get_url_filter_logs. No alternative tools or exclusionary conditions are mentioned.

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