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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so safety is structured. The description adds genuinely useful nuance beyond that: the removal is scoped to one dashboard, the query survives in list_queries and on other dashboards, and the change is applied ('Saved when this runs'). It stops short of mentioning permissions or how the change is confirmed, so not quite top marks.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope, then the alternative, then the persistence note and prerequisite. No filler; every clause carries decision-relevant information.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating the resulting state (query retained elsewhere, change saved). Combined with the skill prerequisite and the sibling pointer, nothing an agent needs to invoke this 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline would be 3. The description still adds meaning: it tells the agent to justify the action in 'reason' and clarifies the pairing of dashboard vs. query identity that dashboardId and queryId represent, which reduces mis-targeting among 5 required integer/string params.

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 ('Take a saved query off one dashboard') and immediately bounds the effect ('the query itself is kept'). It is clearly separable from delete_query, add_query_to_dashboard, and remove_panel among the many siblings.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative with its selecting condition ('To delete the query everywhere, use delete_query') and a prerequisite ('Load the manage-dashboards skill ... first'). An agent knows when to pick this tool and what must precede it.

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