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. It states 'Delete' which implies a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: no mention of permissions required, whether deletion is reversible, what happens to associated data, or any rate limits. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 destructive operation with no annotations, no output schema, and 0 parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what an 'archive' is in this context, what the deletion entails, or what the expected outcome is. For a tool that performs deletion, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

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% coverage, meaning there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. A baseline of 4 is appropriate since there are no parameters to explain, though it doesn't explicitly state that no parameters are required.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a given archive from your organization'), which provides a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from other delete operations in the sibling list (like delete_logs_config_archive_readers or delete_logs_config_custom_destination), so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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. There are no prerequisites mentioned, no indication of what constitutes 'a given archive', and no reference to related tools like create_logs_config_archives or get_logs_config_archive that might be relevant. It's a bare statement with no contextual usage information.

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