datadog_monitor_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It states the output is YAML, which is helpful, but does not disclose if the operation is read-only, permissions needed, rate limits, or error handling. This is minimal transparency for a tool without annotations.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence clearly states the action and input, and the second mentions the output format and CLI mirror. No extraneous words, front-loaded with the key purpose.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter usage, and output format. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools (list/search) and does not mention error cases, which limits completeness for an agent.

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% for the single parameter 'monitor_id', with a description already in the schema. The description adds 'by numeric id' confirming the integer type, but this adds limited value beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch a single Datadog monitor by numeric id,' specifying the action, resource, and unique identifier. It differentiates from sibling tools like datadog_monitor_list and datadog_monitor_search by emphasizing 'single' and 'numeric id'.

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 mentions the tool mirrors a specific CLI command and requires a numeric ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., list or search), nor does it provide conditions or exclusions.

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