capture_dashboard_template

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states the action. It does not mention whether the original dashboard is modified, any destructive or read-only implications, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The effect on the existing dashboard and the template creation process remains unclear.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is too brief given the tool's complexity (six parameters, output schema). It could elaborate on key points without becoming verbose, so it is minimally adequate but not optimally 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?

Despite having an output schema (reducing the need to explain return values), the description omits parameter semantics, behavioral details, and usage guidelines. With six parameters and a sibling tool for similar functionality, the description is incomplete and fails to provide sufficient context for correct invocation.

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?

The description does not explain any of the six parameters (dashboard_id, portable, include_query_context, include_dataset_schema, output_path, response_mode). Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description must compensate but adds no parameter guidance, leaving the agent to infer from names and defaults alone.

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 captures a reusable dashboard+chart template from an existing dashboard, using the specific verb 'capture' and resource 'dashboard+chart template'. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'capture_golden_templates', which likely serves a similar purpose.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'capture_golden_templates', 'export_dashboard', or other creation tools. It lacks any context for appropriate usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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