datadog_downtime_list

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses output format (YAML) but lacks details on read-only nature, required permissions, or potential side effects. This misses an opportunity to inform the agent.

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?

Two sentences with the core action front-loaded. No unnecessary words, though it could be more structured. Conciseness is good but not perfect.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description adequately covers purpose and parameter but lacks details like default behavior when active_only is omitted, error cases, or expected output structure beyond YAML format.

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 coverage is 100%; the description essentially repeats the schema description for 'active_only'. No additional meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides, making this baseline acceptable.

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 it lists Datadog scheduled downtimes, with the verb 'list' and resource 'scheduled downtimes'. It is unambiguous but does not explicitly contrast with sibling Datadog tools like datadog_monitor_list.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other Datadog tools). The reference to 'omni-dev datadog downtime list' is a CLI mirror but does not provide usage context or exclusions.

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