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

By specifying 'visibility and grants,' the description clarifies exactly what kind of data is returned, which adds crucial behavioral context beyond the generic 'read' action and the safety 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 definition is extremely concise and the single sentence is perfectly framed to deliver its core purpose without unnecessary jargon or padding.

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 successfully communicates the core function by naming the specific types of data returned (visibility and grants). While it could be more detailed regarding the expected return structure, it is complete enough for the agent to select the correct tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input parameter 'dashboardId' is fully documented in the schema. The description does not add semantic meaning beyond what is already structurally 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?

The description clearly identifies the action ('Read') and the resource ('dashboard sharing') and specifies the content ('visibility and grants'). However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like 'report_list_sharing_principals'.

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, nor does it define any necessary preconditions or expected output structure.

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