MCP Server for Splunk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: it returns a structured list with specific fields (topic key, description, example usage) and explains its role in the workflow (discovery before using get_admin_guide). However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits or authentication needs.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses bullet points for output details efficiently and ends with clear usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 parameterless tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good context: purpose, output structure, and usage guidance. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning if the list is always current or cached, but it adequately covers the essentials for this simple discovery tool.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, which is correct for a parameterless tool. It focuses on the tool's purpose and output instead, adding value beyond the empty schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'List all available admin guide topics with descriptions.' It specifies the verb ('List'), resource ('admin guide topics'), and output format ('structured list'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_available_topics' by focusing specifically on admin documentation.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this tool to discover what admin documentation is available before calling get_admin_guide with specific topics.' It provides clear context for usage and names the alternative tool ('get_admin_guide') for subsequent actions.

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