List Triggered Alerts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does well by disclosing a non-obvious behavioral quirk: Splunk's fired alerts feed may not strictly filter by time, and earliest/latest are advisory. It also mentions the max results cap. It does not detail permissions or response shape, but the key operational caveat is transparently surfaced.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by practical use context and an important caveat. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant restating of the tool name or schema fields.

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 operation with no output schema or annotations, the description provides sufficient context: what is returned, how to filter, and the advisory nature of time constraints. It stops short of describing result format or edge cases, but it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, providing baseline meaning for all four parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that 'search' is a name filter, 'count' is a max results cap, and the time parameters are only advisory—beyond what the schema states. This enriches the parameter semantics meaningfully.

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 ('List') and resource ('fired alerts'), and clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_saved_searches or run_splunk_search by focusing on triggered alert details. The listed fields (saved search name, trigger time, owner/app, trigger reason) make the purpose 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?

The phrase 'Use this to review recent triggered alerts' provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is distinct enough from sibling tools that the usage guidance is adequate.

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