byok-observability-mcp

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 implies a read-only operation by using 'List' and mentions the output format, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling. It adds some context about the UID's use, but behavioral traits are not fully disclosed.

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 front-loads the purpose and includes usage guidance without any wasted words. Every part of the sentence adds value, 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 the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete for a list operation. It explains the purpose, usage, and output details, but could improve by mentioning behavioral aspects like permissions or limitations, though this is a minor gap.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description does not add param details, which is appropriate, earning a baseline score of 4 as it compensates adequately for the lack of 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 specific action ('List all datasources'), the resource ('configured in Grafana'), and the output details ('name, type, UID'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on datasources rather than alerts, dashboards, or metrics, making the purpose explicit and distinct.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('to find the UID needed for grafana_query_metrics') and provides a clear alternative (grafana_query_metrics), guiding the agent on its purpose and relationship with other tools in the context.

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