list_lookup_files

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the return structure (metadata fields) and implies read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or performance considerations beyond the default count.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences. No unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: first states purpose and return, second gives usage advice and alternative. Excellent structure.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, description covers main purpose, metadata returned, and usage context. Does not explain pagination details or how to interpret sharing/permissions, but given the tool's simplicity and the parameter documentation, it is largely sufficient.

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% (all 5 parameters described in schema). Description adds no additional parameter details beyond what schema already provides. Baseline of 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?

Clear verb+resource ('List CSV lookup table files') and explicitly states it returns metadata. Distinguishes itself from sibling run_splunk_search by recommending that tool for viewing content. Purpose is unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('to discover available lookup files') and when to use an alternative ('to view actual CSV content, use run_splunk_search'). However, does not mention sibling tools like list_lookup_definitions, which might be an alternative for similar purposes.

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