grafana_gerar_link_explore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether the link is time-limited or signed, whether it requires authentication to open, or whether anything is persisted server-side; it only asserts that a link is produced. For a 4-param tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action and the key qualifier. The leading '68.' is numbering noise, but the sentence itself is efficient.

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?

With four undocumented parameters, no annotations, and only an output schema covering the return value, a one-line description is not enough for an agent to call it correctly — especially the time-range pair, whose defaults and format are never described.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and does not. 'consulta pré-carregada' maps loosely to the consulta parameter, but datasource_uid, de, and ate (the time range, including the now-1h/now defaults) are never explained, so half the parameters remain opaque.

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?

Uses a specific verb and resource: generate a navigable link to Explore mode with the query preloaded. This is clearly distinguishable from the sibling 'gerar_link_dashboard', but that sibling is not named explicitly, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'with the preloaded query' — an agent can infer this is for opening a specific query in Grafana Explore, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative routing (e.g., vs. gerar_link_dashboard or executar_consulta).

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