MCP Datadog Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Adds a user to a role,' implying a mutation operation, but does not cover permissions required, side effects (e.g., if the user already has the role), rate limits, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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: 'Adds a user to a role.' It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 that this is a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0 parameters, the description is minimal. It states the purpose but lacks critical context such as behavioral details (e.g., permissions, idempotency), usage guidelines, or output expectations, making it incomplete for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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, meaning no parameters need documentation. The description does not add parameter information, which is appropriate here. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as there is nothing to compensate for.

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 'Adds a user to a role' clearly states the action (adds) and the target (user to a role), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_role_users' or 'get_role_users', which handle removal or retrieval of role users respectively, so it lacks explicit sibling distinction.

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 does not mention prerequisites (e.g., existing roles or users), exclusions, or refer to sibling tools like 'delete_role_users' for removal or 'create_roles' for role creation, leaving usage context unclear.

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