Create Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation (creating a search job) and hints at a returned RSID, but never states whether results are returned inline, whether the search must be polled, whether it expires, or what auth/limits apply.

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 no filler, which is structurally clean, but it is terse to the point of under-specification for a 6-parameter tool rather than genuinely economical.

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 tool with 6 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. The description should at minimum explain the query/time-range semantics and the RSID lifecycle the caller must follow up on.

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% across 6 parameters (query, from, until, size, order, account), and the description adds nothing about any of them — not even that 'query' accepts a Loggly search syntax string or that 'from'/'until' are time expressions. This is a clear gap the description fails to compensate for.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Creates a Loggly search') and adds a return-value hint ('RSID metadata'). It does not, however, distinguish this from close siblings such as search_logs or search_and_get_events, so the agent must guess which search entry point to use.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no indication that this is the first step of a two-phase create-then-iterate flow, and no mention of alternatives like search_and_get_events or iterate_events_page. The agent is left to infer the workflow entirely.

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