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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries a lower bar, but it adds nothing: it does not say whether removal is permanent, whether the tile's underlying report/data survives, or what happens if tileId is unknown. Most notably, a 'remove' operation paired with destructiveHint=false deserves an explicit note about reversibility, which is absent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the terseness comes at the cost of the missing context noted elsewhere rather than being a wording defect.

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 two-ID mutation with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to attempt the call, but it omits reversibility, error behavior on missing tiles, and how to obtain the required IDs — gaps that matter for a destructive-ish operation sitting among many dashboard siblings.

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?

Both parameters are required and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. 'One tile from a dashboard' only restates that both IDs are needed; no format, ID provenance (e.g., from get_dashboard or list_dashboard_tile_types), or validation behavior is provided.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Remove one tile from a dashboard.' An agent can immediately tell this deletes a single tile rather than a whole dashboard or updating tile config, differentiating it implicitly from delete_dashboard and update_dashboard_tile.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the closely related siblings (update_dashboard_tile for editing, delete_dashboard for removing all tiles, add_dashboard_tile). The agent must infer that this is the correct tool from the name alone.

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