generate_loki_explore_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool generates a URL but doesn't explain what the URL is used for (e.g., linking to a Grafana Explore view), whether it performs any validation, or if it has side effects like logging. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, with no wasted information.

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 the complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover parameter meanings, usage context, or behavioral details like what the generated URL looks like or how to use it. For a tool that likely produces a web link for log analysis, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% schema description coverage. It doesn't explain what parameters like 'datasourceUid', 'query', 'from', 'to', or 'refresh' represent, their expected formats (e.g., time strings for 'from'/'to'), or how they affect the generated URL. With 5 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameters undocumented.

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's purpose: 'Generate an Explore URL for Loki log queries.' It specifies the verb ('Generate'), resource ('Explore URL'), and domain ('Loki log queries'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_explore_url' or 'generate_prometheus_explore_url', which would require explicit comparison.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'generate_explore_url' (generic) or 'generate_prometheus_explore_url', nor does it specify prerequisites, such as needing a valid datasource or query. Without this context, an agent might struggle to choose the correct tool.

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