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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds useful context about the dashboard being short-lived and auto-expiring after one hour. It does not describe auth requirements or failure behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 sentence with no filler; the key action, resource, and expiry constraint are all front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter delete operation with a strong annotation profile and an output schema, the description covers what is deleted and when. The main gap is token provenance, but this is partially inferable from sibling import tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions the 'token' parameter. An agent must infer that the token identifies which imported dashboard to delete, with no guidance on where the token comes from or its format.

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 ('Delete') and a specific resource ('short-lived imported dashboard') with a clear expiry constraint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like option_import_snapshot and option_validate_snapshot without needing to inspect schemas.

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?

It provides clear timing context: deletion is meant to happen before the automatic one-hour expiry, implying this is optional early cleanup. It does not name an alternative or explicit when-not-to-use condition, but the intended scenario is clear.

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