get_dashboard_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool is for 'Get[ting]' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. The phrase 'minimize context window usage' hints at efficiency but lacks concrete behavioral details, leaving significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get specific parts of a dashboard') and includes a rationale ('to minimize context window usage'). There is zero waste, and every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a tool that performs data extraction (which can have complex behavioral aspects like error cases or partial returns), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'specific parts' means in practice, how JSONPath expressions are evaluated, or what the return format looks like, making it inadequate for full contextual understanding.

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%, with both parameters ('uid' and 'jsonPath') well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'JSONPath expressions' and 'dashboard', but doesn't provide additional syntax examples, format details, or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Get specific parts of a dashboard using JSONPath expressions.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('dashboard'), and method ('JSONPath expressions'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_dashboard_by_uid' or 'get_dashboard_summary' by focusing on partial extraction. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these siblings, missing full differentiation.

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 implies usage context: 'to minimize context window usage' suggests this tool is for targeted data retrieval when full dashboard content is unnecessary. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_dashboard_by_uid' or 'get_dashboard_summary', and doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage somewhat ambiguous.

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