dashboards_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It clearly indicates the destructive nature ('Delete') and notes the permission requirement, which is helpful. However, it does not mention whether deletion is permanent, what happens if no dashboards match, or what the API returns, leaving significant behavioral gaps for a destructive operation.

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 appropriately sized: a one-line summary, a source note, a permission warning, the endpoint, and an example. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose. The example adds length but is useful and not redundant.

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 complexity (nested filters, multiple field types) and the absence of an output schema, the description provides essential context: what it deletes, permission requirements, and an example. However, it omits information about the response format, behavior on no matches, or any side effects beyond deletion, leaving the agent guessing about the outcome.

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 reported as 0% for the sole parameter, so the description must compensate. It provides a concrete JSON example showing the structure of request_data with filters, field, value, and operator. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, but it does not explain all possible fields or operators, and the example only demonstrates EQ, so coverage is incomplete.

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 'Delete dashboards' and specifies it deletes dashboards retrieved by the Get dashboards API. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from other delete tools like distributions_delete or indicators_delete.

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 provides a clear prerequisite (Instance Administrator permissions) and an example request body showing how to filter dashboards. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of full usage guidance.

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