get-monitor

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

No annotations are present to declare safety or read-only behavior. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the monitor ID is invalid. The agent is left to infer these aspects.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word is necessary, with no redundancy or extraneous content.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not elaborate on what 'detailed information' includes, nor does it explain the effect of 'groupStates' or 'extractFields' beyond schema. While adequate for basic use, it leaves room for confusion about the response 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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already available. The schema provides sufficient information for each parameter, fulfilling the baseline.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a specific Datadog monitor by ID'. This is distinct from sibling tools like 'get-monitors' (plural, lists monitors) and 'update-monitor' (modifies), making the purpose 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-monitors', 'update-monitor', or 'delete-monitor'. It lacks context for choosing this tool over siblings, offering only the action itself.

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