aggregate-logs

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations by describing aggregation, which is a read operation. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what the annotations already provide, such as query limits or data freshness.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key verb and resource. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 description covers the aggregation types and grouping, but lacks any mention of the return format (e.g., time series or table) or pagination behavior. Given the absence of an output schema, this information would be valuable for agent understanding.

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 has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The description's mention of 'count, avg, sum, percentiles and grouping' provides a high-level summary of the aggregation enum and groupBy parameter but does not add substantial new meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Aggregate', the resource 'Datadog logs', and the types of computations ('count, avg, sum, percentiles') and grouping. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search-logs' and 'aggregate-ci-pipelines'.

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 aggregated statistical queries via the words 'statistical computations' and 'grouping', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'search-logs' or when not to use it.

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