List saved Arkime views

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive; the description adds that views are per-user/per-role, so results reflect the configured account rather than the whole server, and that returned objects carry owner and roles fields. This goes beyond annotations and helps set expectations.

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 longer than minimal, but each sentence adds value: purpose, usage, alternatives, scope limitation, and output schema pointer. It could be trimmed slightly, but the structure is clear and front-loaded.

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 annotations, output schema, and a single well-documented parameter, this description fully equips an agent to select and invoke the tool: it covers what, when, why, scope, and provides pointers to related tools. No gaps remain.

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 only parameter, limit, is fully documented in the schema (type, default, min, max, description), so the description does not need to add more. Baseline 3 applies due to high schema coverage; no additional param semantics are provided, but none are necessary.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'List the saved search views this Arkime holds, with each one's expression.' It further distinguishes from arkime_shortcuts, arkime_field_search, and arkime_create_view, making 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?

It explicitly states when to use: 'Use this to find the queries the human team already curated before writing your own' and names specific alternatives for different needs, along with a noted prerequisite for arkime_create_view. This is direct when-to-use guidance.

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