get_dashboard

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the '[READ]' tag is largely redundant. What does add value is disclosing the return shape ('summary' with title, version, panel + tag counts), which tells the agent it will not receive the full dashboard model. No auth or rate-limit details, but those are secondary here.

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?

Front-loaded with the read tag and a one-line purpose, followed by a compact args block. Every sentence is load-bearing and there is no 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?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, the scope of the returned summary, and both arguments. It is nearly self-sufficient; only the uid string format is left unstated.

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 description must carry the params, and it does: uid is explained with its source (list_dashboards) and target is explained as a config name with omit-for-default behavior. Both parameters gain meaning beyond the bare schema types, though the uid format itself is not described.

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 a specific verb+resource ('One dashboard's summary') and enumerates what the summary contains (title, version, panel + tag counts). This cleanly separates it from list_dashboards (bulk list) and update_dashboard/delete_dashboard, though the differentiation is implied by scope rather than stated explicitly against a named sibling.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement, but the uid note ('from list_dashboards') implies the prerequisite workflow: list first, then fetch a single dashboard's summary. Usage is inferable but not spelled out, and no alternatives are named.

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