splunk_diagnose_performance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral-disclosure burden. It lists assessed dimensions but says nothing about whether the tool is read-only, how expensive the multi-dimensional assessment is, what permissions are needed, or whether it triggers searches.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It immediately communicates the composite nature and the dimensions assessed, wasting no words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description adequately names the dimensions, but it lacks guidance on when this composite tool is preferable to targeted sibling diagnostics and omits behavioral context such as cost or safety.

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 are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline score of 4 applies because the schema is trivially complete and the description does not need to compensate for undocumented inputs.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a composite performance assessment covering CPU, memory, scheduler, disk, and search latency. This distinguishes it from single-domain siblings like splunk_get_scheduler_health and splunk_get_search_performance, though the phrasing is a noun phrase rather than a direct verb+resource statement.

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 description only implies broad use by calling it a 'Composite tool' and listing dimensions. It does not state when to choose this over targeted siblings such as splunk_get_scheduler_health or splunk_get_server_health, nor does it provide exclusions or triage guidance.

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