get_splunk_documentation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool wraps resources and returns embedded content for agentic frameworks, a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., invalid URI), authentication needs, or version auto-detection behavior beyond the parameter default.

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 two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: identifying the tool's action and explaining its behavioral adaptation. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 explains the core purpose and a key behavioral trait. However, it lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., Splunk authentication), error conditions, and relationship to the many sibling documentation tools. Without annotations or output schema, it could better cover what the agent needs to know for successful invocation.

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 100% (both parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds a reference to list_available_topics() and example URIs, but the schema already includes extensive examples. The description adds marginal value beyond the schema, 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 clearly states 'Retrieve any Splunk documentation by URI pattern,' specifying a verb and resource. It mentions supporting all documentation types, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_spl_reference or get_troubleshooting_guide, which are more specific.

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 advises using list_available_topics() to see URI patterns, providing implicit usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus the many specific sibling documentation tools, nor does it give explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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