Get Grafana data source

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'configuration metadata' as a scope cue but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the UID does not exist. This is acceptable given existing 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the action, the target resource, and the selection key.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter), rich annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what an agent needs to know to invoke the tool correctly. No critical information appears missing.

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 input schema already fully documents the single parameter 'uid' with its description 'Grafana data source UID', and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('configuration metadata for one data source'), and a precise identifier ('by UID'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_datasources and check_datasource_health by scoping to a single data source's metadata.

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 phrase 'one data source by UID' clearly indicates the tool is for retrieving a specific data source's configuration when the UID is known. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to infer when to use it versus listing or health-checking.

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