generate_prometheus_explore_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool generates a URL but doesn't describe what the URL is for (e.g., linking to a Grafana Explore view), whether it requires authentication, any rate limits, or the format of the output. For a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in 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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Generate an Explore URL'), making it easy to parse. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, such as by hinting at the output type.

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 (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the tool's behavior, parameter meanings, or output format, which are critical for an agent to use it correctly. Sibling tools like 'generate_loki_explore_url' suggest this is part of a family, but the description doesn't leverage that context.

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%, meaning none of the 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description only vaguely mentions 'specific options' without explaining what the parameters (datasourceUid, query, from, to, refresh, step, range) mean or how they affect the generated URL. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving parameters largely unexplained.

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 Prometheus queries with specific options.' It specifies the verb ('Generate'), resource ('Explore URL'), and domain ('Prometheus queries'), making the intent unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_explore_url' or 'generate_loki_explore_url,' which would require mentioning it's specifically for Prometheus vs. other data sources.

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_loki_explore_url' (for Loki), nor does it specify prerequisites, such as needing a valid datasourceUid or query. This lack of context leaves the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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