splunk_get_parsing_errors

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the source index (_internal), implying a read-only diagnostic query and hinting at required index access. But it says nothing about permissions, volume, or result shape, so the disclosure is partial.

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?

One sentence of purpose plus one line of parameter info, front-loaded and free of filler. The 'Args:' block is slightly mechanical but costs nothing.

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, and the single parameter is covered. What's missing is disambiguation from the closely-named sibling diagnostic tools and any note on scope or cost of querying _internal.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: earliest_time is described as the search window and its default '-24h@h' is restated in prose. It still doesn't give the expected time-modifier syntax, but the single parameter is usable from this text alone.

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?

Specific verb ('Detect') plus enumerated resource categories (timestamp parsing, line-breaking, regex extraction errors) and the data source (_internal), which is genuinely informative. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the very similar sibling splunk_get_internal_errors.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus splunk_get_internal_errors, splunk_diagnose_ingestion, or splunk_detect_data_quality_issues, all of which overlap. Only an implicit 'use it for parsing troubleshooting' can be inferred from the name and description.

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