splunk_create_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the write-mode requirement and states the aging-to-frozen behavior, which is meaningful context for a mutating tool, but it omits failure modes (duplicate name), irreversibility, and permission scope.

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 core action and the write-mode constraint are front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a tight Args list. The Args entries slightly restate the schema's defaults, but each still earns its place.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and all three parameters are documented. A creation tool with no annotations would ideally state duplicate-name behavior and permission requirements, which is the remaining gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the Args block does the work: it explains that name must be unique, that max_size_mb is in megabytes with a 10,000 MB default, and that frozen_retention_days is the window before aging to frozen. All three parameters gain meaning beyond the bare schema types, though units for the retention field could be restated.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new Splunk index') plus the dimensions it controls (storage capacity, retention limits), which distinguishes it from the read-side siblings like splunk_get_index and splunk_list_indexes. It stops short of explicitly naming splunk_update_index_settings as the alternative for existing indexes.

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?

'(requires write mode)' gives one real precondition for use. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over splunk_update_index_settings, no mention of admin/permission prerequisites, and no statement about what happens if the index name already exists.

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