Skip to main content
Glama
brukhabtu

Datadog MCP Server

by brukhabtu

ListIncidentTodos

Retrieve all todos associated with a specific incident using the incident UUID. Streamline incident management by accessing task details and related resources in JSON format.

Instructions

Get all todos for an incident.

Path Parameters:

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

Responses:

  • 200 (Success): OK

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • data: An array of incident todos.

      • included: Included related resources that the user requested.

    • Example:

{
  "data": [
    "unknown_type"
  ],
  "included": [
    "unknown_type"
  ],
  "meta": "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.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesAn array of incident todos.
metaNo
includedNoIncluded related resources that the user requested.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions HTTP responses (e.g., 200, 400, 429) and includes example error structures, which adds some context on error handling and rate limits. However, it fails to describe critical behaviors like pagination, sorting, filtering options, or authentication requirements, leaving significant gaps for a list operation tool.

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 clutter the core purpose. It includes redundant error examples and properties like 'unknown_type' in JSON examples, which add little value. The front-loaded purpose statement is clear, but subsequent sections are bloated and inefficient.

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 the tool's complexity as a list operation with no annotations but an output schema (implied by response details), the description partially covers context by including response structures and error codes. However, it misses key aspects like pagination, filtering, or authentication needs, making it incomplete for effective agent use despite the output schema providing some return value information.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'incident_id' fully documented in the schema as 'The UUID of the incident'. The description repeats this in a 'Path Parameters' section but adds no additional meaning, such as format details or validation rules. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 with 'Get all todos for an incident', specifying the verb ('Get') and resource ('todos for an incident'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'GetIncidentTodo', which appears to fetch a single todo, leaving some ambiguity about sibling differentiation.

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. It lacks context on prerequisites, such as authentication or incident access, and does not mention sibling tools like 'GetIncidentTodo' for single-todo retrieval or 'ListIncidents' for broader context, leaving usage unclear.

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