splunk_list_inputs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the kinds of inputs listed but says nothing about read-only status, required permissions, pagination, or result ordering, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.

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 short and front-loaded, leading with the purpose and then documenting the single argument. The 'Args:' block is slightly informal but does not waste space.

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. However, with no annotations and no usage guidance, the description is only minimally complete for an agent choosing between list, get, and manage operations on inputs.

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. It defines 'count' as the maximum number of inputs, which adds meaning beyond the bare schema property, but it omits how the default of 100 applies or what happens when count is omitted, so the compensation is only partial.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List configured data inputs', and enumerates the input types (TCP, UDP, monitor, scripts, HTTP Event Collector). It does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like splunk_get_input or splunk_manage_input, so it stays at 4 rather than 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as splunk_get_input (for a single input) or splunk_manage_input (for changes). The description only states what the tool does, leaving selection entirely to the agent.

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