Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Datadog MCP Server

Datadog MCP Server

by peterlozano
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_dashboard

Retrieve complete details of a Datadog dashboard, including widgets, queries, and layout. Use a dashboard ID to inspect its structure.

Instructions

Get full details of a Datadog dashboard including widgets, queries, and layout.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "dashboardId": "<dashboardId>"
    },
    "name": "get_dashboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dashboardIdYesThe dashboard ID (e.g. 'abc-def-ghi')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a non-destructive read and it discloses the returned content (widgets, queries, layout), but it says nothing about authorization requirements, rate limits, or behavior when the dashboard ID does not exist.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first and the returned contents second. No filler or redundant restatement of the name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers both purpose and return shape adequately. It stops short of noting error behavior for invalid IDs or any prerequisite, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the sole dashboardId parameter is fully documented with a format example in the schema. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (Datadog dashboard), and enumerates the returned scope: widgets, queries, layout. The singular 'a dashboard' implicitly separates it from the sibling list_dashboards, though it never names that sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: use this to fetch one dashboard when you already have its ID. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to the list_dashboards alternative for discovery.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools