Skip to main content
Glama
brukhabtu

Datadog MCP Server

by brukhabtu

GetIncident

Retrieve detailed information about a specific incident by its UUID, including optional related resources, to streamline incident analysis and response within the Datadog MCP Server.

Instructions

Get the details of an incident by incident_id.

Path Parameters:

  • incident_id (Required): The UUID of the incident.

Query Parameters:

  • include: Specifies which types of related objects should be included in the response.

Responses:

  • 200 (Success): OK

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • included: Included related resources that the user requested.

    • Example:

{
  "data": "unknown_type",
  "included": [
    "unknown_type"
  ]
}
  • 400: Bad Request

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 401: Unauthorized

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 403: Forbidden

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 404: Not Found

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 429: Too many requests

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
incident_idYesThe UUID of the incident.
includeNoSpecifies which types of related objects should be included in the response.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
includedNoIncluded related resources that the user requested.
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It includes HTTP response codes (200, 400, 401, 403, 404, 429) which hint at error conditions and rate limiting, but doesn't explicitly describe authentication needs, rate limit specifics, or what 'Get' entails operationally (e.g., read-only, safe). This is a significant gap for a tool with no 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.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is overly verbose and poorly structured, with extensive HTTP response details that belong in an output schema rather than the description. It includes redundant parameter sections and multiple error examples, making it bloated and not front-loaded with essential usage information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that an output schema exists (implied by 'Has output schema: true'), the description doesn't need to explain return values, which it does excessively. However, for a tool with no annotations and two parameters, it lacks context on when to use it versus siblings and behavioral traits, making it incomplete despite the output schema support.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents both parameters ('incident_id' and 'include') fully. The description repeats this information verbatim without adding any extra meaning, syntax details, or examples beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Get the details of an incident by `incident_id`', which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'SearchIncidents' or 'ListIncidents', which reduces the score from a perfect 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 like 'SearchIncidents' or 'ListIncidents'. It mentions parameters but doesn't explain the context or prerequisites for usage, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/brukhabtu/datadog-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server