create_dashboard

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It discloses the preview-vs-write duality and the confirm requirement, which is critical for avoiding unintended mutations. However, it does not disclose other potential side effects, permission requirements, or what the preview vs create modes return.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff. However, it is minimal enough that it leaves some gaps, though for the amount of content presented, it is appropriately concise.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to provide complete context. It does not describe return values, error conditions, or how preview mode output differs from create mode. The confirm requirement is helpful but does not cover the full range of behaviors an agent might encounter.

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 compensate for missing parameter explanations. It only explains the confirm parameter ('required to write'). Other parameters (slug, owners, published, dashboard_title) have self-evident names but no explicit description of constraints, formats, or how they interact with the preview/create behavior.

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 verb 'create' and the resource 'dashboard', and adds the nuance of 'Preview or create', which distinguishes it from pure creation tools. It also mentions the confirm=true write requirement, which is a specific behavior not present in siblings like update_dashboard. However, it doesn't fully elaborate on what 'preview' entails or explicitly contrast with list/get dashboard tools.

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 states the key condition for actual creation: confirm=true is required to write. This implies that the tool should be used when the agent wants to either preview a dashboard or create it, and that without confirm=true it stays in preview mode. But it does not explicitly say when to use this over alternatives (e.g., update_dashboard) or mention any prerequisites for creation.

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