usage_dashboard

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that it launches a local web server, opens in VS Code Simple Browser, and requires no API key. Lacks details on port collision handling or cleanup, but sufficient for a non-destructive launch tool.

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?

Single sentence of 20 words, front-loads the main purpose, and every phrase adds value. No unnecessary information.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explains the user-facing result (interactive charts and dashboard). For a launch action, this is adequately complete; missing details about the server shutdown or refresh behavior would improve but not essential.

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 coverage is 100%—the single 'port' parameter is already described in the schema. The description adds no additional context beyond what is in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Launch' and resource 'local web dashboard showing Claude Code token usage with interactive charts'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like usage_stats or usage_breakdown which are non-interactive data reports.

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?

Explicitly indicates when to use (to view token usage interactively) and notes 'Opens in VS Code Simple Browser' and 'No API key required'. However, it does not mention when not to use or compare with sibling usage tools.

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