Get Config Spec

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return content ('comprehensive reference with all configuration options, syntax, and examples') and the verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it does not address potential errors, prerequisites, or scope limitations. A 3 reflects minimal transparency beyond the obvious.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The description front-loads the action and result; every phrase contributes to understanding what the tool returns.

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 single-parameter documentation lookup tool, the description provides sufficient detail about the return value and uses the schema to handle the parameter. With no output schema or annotations, a little more specificity about the output format would improve completeness, but the low complexity keeps it adequate.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage, including format details and examples ('props.conf', 'transforms', 'indexes.conf'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema fully compensates, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource as 'detailed Splunk configuration file specification documentation.' It distinguishes from siblings like list_config_files or get_configurations by stating it returns documentation rather than actual configs. Evidence: 'Returns comprehensive reference with all configuration options, syntax, and examples.'

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. It implies usage via the schema parameter hint to use list_config_files() to see common files, but the main description lacks a direct when-to-use/when-not-to-use framing. This is adequate but not explicit.

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