run_splunk_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool executes arbitrary SPL, defines parameters and defaults, and returns a list of results. However, it does not explicitly warn about potential side effects of arbitrary SPL or mention error behavior, leaving some ambiguity.

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 compact docstring with the purpose in the first line, followed by an Args list and Returns line. Every sentence adds necessary information with no filler.

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 description covers the alias relationship, all parameters, and return type, making it sufficient for basic selection and invocation. However, it lacks guidance on error handling, authentication, or performance implications of arbitrary queries, which would be useful for a tool this powerful.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: query, earliest_time, latest_time, and max_results, each with a clear meaning and default values drawn from the 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Execute arbitrary SPL query.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly identifying as an alias for search_splunk, which differentiates it from the near-duplicate sibling tool.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: it is an alias for search_splunk, intended for compatibility with the label harvester. This implies using search_splunk for new integrations, though it does not explicitly exclude other cases.

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