Loki MCP Server

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

The description contradicts the annotations by describing a 'List' operation (typically read-only) while annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. It fails to explain what makes this destructive or how the time range parameters affect behavior.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words with zero waste. The value proposition is front-loaded and immediately clear.

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?

While the core purpose is stated, the description is incomplete given the destructive annotations and lack of output schema. It fails to resolve the contradiction between 'listing' and 'destructive' behavior or explain what data is returned.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides regarding the time range format or semantics.

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), resource (label names in Loki), and context (for building LogQL queries), distinguishing it from sibling tools like query or label_values.

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 mentions the purpose ('for building LogQL queries') providing implied context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus label_values or query tools, and doesn't mention prerequisites.

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