grafana_list_datasources

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

The description explicitly states the tool is 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and adequately discloses that the tool does not mutate state. It also mentions the return fields, adding transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and a second sentence providing a usage hint. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It states the read-only nature, the returned fields, and a practical usage hint. No additional information is needed for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not add parameter information because there are none. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool is a 'Read-only list of configured Grafana datasources' and specifies the returned fields (uid, name, type, is_default). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like grafana_query and grafana_get_dashboard by focusing solely on datasource listing.

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?

The description provides a clear usage hint: 'Use a datasource uid with grafana_query,' which indicates a common workflow. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool, but given the sibling tools are all distinct (no other list tool), this is sufficient.

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