Open Insight Dashboard

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

The annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that it opens a browser (openWorldHint context) and clarifies it's a launcher rather than a data-returning tool. It also details the dashboard contents, which is useful behavioral context beyond the safety flags.

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 three sentences with a clear hierarchy: the core action, the dashboard's analytics content, and the alternative for queries. Every sentence adds distinct value without redundancy, and the most important information (opens dashboard) is front-loaded.

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 simple side-effecting launcher with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary action, the domain of the dashboard, and the correct alternative for a different use case. Given the annotations cover safety and the schema is empty, this is fully complete.

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 schema has zero parameters, and the rubric sets a baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools. The description adds no unnecessary parameter details, which is appropriate since there are none.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Opens the context-mode Insight dashboard in your default browser,' and immediately distinguishes it from a Q&A engine by noting it's a launcher, not a query tool. It also clearly maps to sibling differentiation by pointing to ctx_search for natural-language queries.

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?

It explicitly states the tool's scope ('dashboard launcher for the hosted analytics layer, not a Q&A engine') and provides an explicit alternative: 'For natural-language queries over your indexed content, use ctx_search.' This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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