list_lookup_definitions

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

With no annotations, the description partially compensates by stating it 'returns metadata' and listing fields, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm lack of side effects, permission requirements, or performance implications, leaving gaps.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by return value details. No unnecessary words or redundancy; every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

Given no output schema and simple list operation, the description covers the basic purpose and return fields. However, it omits details on pagination behavior (offset, count), filtering, sorting, or default behavior, leaving some usability gaps despite schema coverage.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter already having a description. The tool description adds brief context about lookup definitions but does not enhance understanding of parameters beyond the schema, meeting the baseline without adding extra value.

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?

Description clearly states it lists lookup definitions (transforms) in Splunk, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_lookup_files by focusing on definitions rather than files, and from broader list_metadata by narrowing to lookups.

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?

Description implies usage for listing lookup definitions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_lookup_files for actual files or other list tools. No exclusion criteria or context for when this tool is appropriate.

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