qradar_get_search_results

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 states the read-only fetch behavior, requires a completed job, describes pagination, and specifies the JSON string return value. It does not mention rate limits or error behaviors, but for a simple retrieval this is adequate.

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 front-loaded with the main action and pagination, followed by a compact Args block and a one-line Returns note. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 output schema covers return structure, while the description supplies the completed-job prerequisite, parameter meanings, and pagination semantics. It is slightly light on explicit sequencing guidance relative to qradar_execute_aql_search and qradar_get_search_status, but nothing essential for invoking it correctly is missing.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args block documents all three parameters: search_id as the UUID, limit as record count with default 50, and offset as pagination start index. This fully compensates for the sparse 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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair, 'Fetch records from a completed Ariel search job,' and adds pagination to the scope. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like qradar_execute_aql_search and qradar_get_search_status.

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 'completed Ariel search job' qualifier gives a clear precondition: the tool should be used only after a search job has finished. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the intended workflow relative to sibling search tools is reasonably clear.

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