search_audit_logs

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Search', implying read-only, but does not confirm this or mention any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or output format. With no annotations, more detail is needed.

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 very concise at one sentence, front-loading the main action and resource. It is efficient with no fluff, though it could include slightly more context without being verbose.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is too minimal to be complete. It does not explain pagination, sorting, or the structure of results, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. It does not explain how parameters relate to the search functionality.

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 'Search', the resource 'Datadog audit logs', and the types of events (configuration changes, user actions, API calls). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools that search other resources like logs or RUM events.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given many sibling search tools, it would be helpful to explicitly note that this is for audit logs only. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide any context for selection.

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