delete_dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses critical side effects: it captures the prior model before deletion, supports a dry-run mode, optionally annotates an audit row with an approver, and ensures the undo can recreate the dashboard. This is rich, honest behavioral disclosure.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: it starts with a risk tag and a one-line summary, then provides necessary details about dry-run, approver, and undo, and concludes with an Args section. Every sentence serves a purpose and there is no verbosity.

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 covers the core behavior, preview mode, audit annotation, and undo mechanism. However, with no output schema, it does not explicitly state what a successful delete returns (only the dry-run returns a title). This minor omission keeps it from a perfect score.

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 0%, so the 'Args' section is essential. It adds meaning to each parameter: uid is sourced from list_dashboards, dry_run previews without deleting, and target selects a Grafana target. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 opens with a clear, specific verb+resource: 'Delete a Grafana dashboard.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_dashboard, list_dashboards, and update_dashboard. The [WRITE] tag further reinforces the operation type.

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 gives practical usage guidance: it instructs to pass dry_run=True for a preview, notes that the UID comes from list_dashboards, and explains the optional target parameter. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for when not to delete, so it stops short of a 5.

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