MCP Datadog Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('Get') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens if the embed_id is invalid. The description is minimal and lacks crucial context for safe invocation.

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 function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, 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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple purpose, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what an 'HTML fragment' entails, potential error conditions, or return format, leaving gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior fully. More context is needed for safe 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, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description mentions `embed_id` as the identifier for retrieval, which aligns with the tool's purpose, but since there are no parameters, this is adequate. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('HTML fragment for a previously generated embed'), specifying it retrieves content using an `embed_id`. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_graph_embeds' or 'get_graph_embeds' by focusing on a single embed retrieval, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other 'get' tools for embeds.

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 implies usage when you have a specific `embed_id` from a previous generation, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'get_graph_embeds' (which might list multiple) or other embed-related tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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