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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. 'Dashboard' implies a safe read-only operation, but the description doesn't confirm this, nor does it mention data sources, freshness, or what the output looks like. It is minimally transparent.

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 description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word is meaningful, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is arguably adequate for basic understanding. However, it lacks contextual differentiation from sibling dashboard tools and doesn't explain what 'control effectiveness' entails, which limits an agent's ability to select it appropriately among alternatives.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description need not add parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 is appropriate here since there is no schema information to supplement.

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 tool as a 'control effectiveness dashboard' across 'DORA control domains', which states the resource and scope. While it doesn't explicitly use a verb like 'show' or 'view', 'dashboard' implies a read-only reporting function. It distinguishes from siblings like kpi_dashboard and board_report by focusing specifically on control effectiveness.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description merely states what it is, with no mention of use cases, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools such as health_check or exception_register.

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