splunk_get_saved_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieve' conveys read-only semantics and the field list signals the response shape, but it says nothing about required permissions, behavior when the name doesn't exist, or whether it includes app/owner scoping. The presence of an output schema lowers the bar for return-value detail, keeping this at 3.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and dense with useful specifics, and the Args block is compact. The only wasted space is the restated 'name' argument line.

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?

Annotations are absent and output schema exists, so the description's job is to convey purpose, scope and the retrieved fields. It does that adequately for a single-parameter read tool; the remaining gaps (name formatting, not-found behavior) are minor. A score of 4 would also be defensible.

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 description must compensate. Its 'name: Name of the saved search.' only restates the schema title and omits the practically critical format (app-scoped/qualified names such as 'app/owner/name') and case sensitivity, adding minimal value.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('saved search'), and enumerates the fields returned (configuration, query, schedule, actions), which distinguishes it from splunk_list_saved_searches and splunk_create_saved_search. It never explicitly names a sibling to contrast with, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: fetching a single saved search's full definition. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus splunk_list_saved_searches, splunk_dispatch_saved_search, or splunk_replay_saved_search, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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