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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden. 'Return the stored definition' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and the compatibility with update_dashboard conveys the output's shape and purpose. It does not disclose possible error cases or any side effects, but for a simple read of one resource this is largely sufficient.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the core behavior is front-loaded, and the second sentence justifies the workflow with a concrete consequence. Every word earns its place.

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 read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description explains what is returned, why it is useful, and how it connects to update_dashboard. No critical information for calling it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the id parameter and its source. The description adds only that the dashboard must exist, which is marginal over the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names the exact action (return the stored definition), the resource (an existing dashboard), and the purpose (editing and handing to update_dashboard). This distinguishes it from list_dashboards/describe_dashboards, which return summaries rather than the full editable definition.

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 explicitly says to call this before update_dashboard and contrasts it with rebuilding a definition from memory. This gives the agent a clear decision rule and warns against a costly alternative.

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