splunk_investigate_host

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 data domains the investigation spans (logs, processes, network, errors), which usefully implies multiple underlying searches and a read-only profile, but it says nothing about required permissions, time-range behavior, or result caps beyond the schema defaults.

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 the args list is compact with no wasted prose. The Args block largely restates parameter names, but its brevity keeps the whole definition tight.

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 described, and the one-required-parameter shape is simple. Still, a three-parameter investigation tool with zero annotations and zero schema descriptions leaves the agent without usage guidance or time-syntax detail.

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 fully document parameters and largely does not. 'Earliest search window' gives no hint that the default '-24h@h' is Splunk relative-time syntax, and 'Maximum events' omits any cap/rationale; only 'host name or FQDN' adds genuine clarity over the schema.

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 (investigate) and a concrete scope: system logs, processes, network connections, and errors for a single host. The resource restriction to 'a host' implicitly distinguishes it from splunk_investigate_ip and splunk_investigate_user, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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_investigate_ip, splunk_investigate_user, splunk_search_events, or splunk_list_hosts, and no prerequisites. The agent must infer selection from the word 'host' alone.

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