MCP Datadog Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Schedule a downtime' implies a write operation but doesn't specify permissions needed, whether it's reversible, rate limits, or what happens upon invocation. This leaves critical behavioral aspects undocumented, though it doesn't contradict any annotations.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a scheduling tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'downtime' means, what gets scheduled, the expected outcome, or any behavioral context, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate here, as the schema fully covers the absence of parameters, warranting a baseline score above 3.

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 'Schedule a downtime' restates the tool name 'create_downtimes' with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It lacks specificity about what resource is being scheduled or what 'downtime' entails in this context, failing to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'downtimes_create' or 'downtimes_cancel'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, and with sibling tools like 'downtimes_create' and 'downtimes_cancel' present, it fails to differentiate usage scenarios, leaving the agent without direction.

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