datadog_monitor_search

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fill in behavioral traits. It discloses auto-pagination up to 10000, YAML output, and mirrors a command. It lacks details on rate limits, authentication, or non-destructive nature, but covers key behaviors adequately.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then key behavior. Efficient and well-structured.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, and output format. It could mention return structure, but 'Output is YAML' provides direction. Sufficient for the complexity.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying the 'limit' parameter behavior (0 or omitted auto-paginates up to 10000), reinforcing and expanding on the schema's description.

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's a free-text/faceted search across Datadog monitors, distinguishing it from sibling tools like datadog_monitor_get (specific monitor) and datadog_monitor_list (list all). The verb 'search' and resource 'Datadog monitors' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for search scenarios with auto-pagination behavior. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the context of sibling tools provides differentiation. A clear, if implicit, guidance.

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