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 'Gets all users', implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, error handling, or what 'all' entails (e.g., all users associated with a role, potentially across an organization). This is a significant gap for a 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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Gets all users of a role'), making it easy to parse quickly. Every word contributes directly to the purpose.

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 (a read operation with no parameters but potential behavioral nuances), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'users' means in this context (e.g., user objects, IDs, names), the return format, or any constraints. For a tool that likely returns a list of users, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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 are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add parameter details, but since there are no parameters, this is acceptable. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as the description doesn't need to compensate for missing schema information.

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 'Gets all users of a role' clearly states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('users of a role'), making the purpose understandable. However, it's somewhat vague about scope (e.g., does 'all' mean all users globally or within a specific context?) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_role' or 'get_users', which might retrieve different data.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a role identifier), exclusions, or related tools like 'get_role' or 'get_users' from the sibling list. This leaves the agent without context for tool selection.

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