splunk__investigate_start

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

The description explains that the tool loads events, runs detectors, and returns findings. It also mentions the cross-referencing behavior when repo_path is provided. Since no annotations are supplied, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior, though it could mention if the operation is read-only or has side effects.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear overview sentence followed by a focused list of parameter details. Every sentence adds necessary information 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?

The description covers all parameters and their interplay, notes prerequisites (SPLUNK_URL for live queries), and states the return format. Given the presence of an output schema, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, the source vs spl trade-off, default time ranges, and the repo_path's role in code cross-referencing. This adds significant value beyond the schema's minimal information.

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 starts a Splunk investigation, loads events, runs detectors, and returns structured findings. It effectively communicates the primary verb and resource, though it could be improved by explicitly differentiating from siblings like splunk__get_findings.

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 provides guidance on when to use source vs spl parameters and explains the prerequisites for live queries. However, it lacks explicit direction on when to use this tool versus alternative sibling tools, such as when to use splunk__get_findings instead.

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