Retrieve all saved search definitions from Graylog, providing access to existing queries for reuse or review.
List all saved searches.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_saved_searches"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the action ('list all') and does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as response format, pagination, sorting, performance implications, or authorization requirements. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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 a single, concise sentence that is appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters and no complex behavior. It is front-loaded with the essential action and resource, containing zero filler words. However, some might argue it is slightly underspecified, but for this simple tool it remains efficient.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the return value looks like (e.g., list of IDs, full objects, metadata). It simply says 'list all saved searches' without providing any context on what fields or structure the returned list will contain, making it incomplete for an agent that needs to process the results.
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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema to document or for the description to supplement. The baseline of 4 applies because the description is not required to explain parameter meanings when none exist.
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 has a specific verb and resource ('List all saved searches') clearly indicating a read operation that returns a collection of saved searches. It distinguishes from siblings like get_saved_search (single) and delete_saved_search (mutation) by explicitly stating 'all'.
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 'List all saved searches' implies the tool is used to retrieve the full set of saved searches, and the sibling names clarify alternatives (e.g., get_saved_search for a specific one). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions, leaving the guidance implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.