dashboards_add_view_to_dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only says 'Add a new view,' indicating a create operation, but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., whether it modifies a dashboard config), or idempotency. The tool likely writes data, but no warnings or clarifications are given.

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 very short, with one sentence for purpose and one for an example. Every word is useful, but it could be more structured, e.g., separating parameter details or adding a hint about the output.

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 the tool having two parameters (one nested) and no annotations, the description is minimal. It lacks details on how to construct view_config beyond the example, what the tool returns (though output schema exists), error cases, or integration with other dashboard tools. For a mutation tool modifying dashboard layout, more completeness is needed.

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 input schema has two parameters with 0% description coverage. The description partially compensates by providing an example of the 'view_config' parameter, showing it expects title, icon, and cards. However, it does not explain the 'url_path' parameter (the dashboard identifier) or the full structure of view_config (e.g., valid fields, card format).

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 'Add a new view to a dashboard,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'dashboards_add_card_to_view' which adds cards to an existing view, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring an existing dashboard, nor does it specify when to prefer this over other dashboard tools. The example provides some usage context but no explicit conditions.

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