set_dashboard_config

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

Fully discloses the behavioral implications: overwrites entire dashboard, updates every open browser live, backs up first, requires admin token, and only works on storage-mode dashboards. Also explains dry_run behavior. Since no annotations exist, this description carries the full burden and meets it.

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?

Description is somewhat verbose but every sentence adds value—warnings, parameter details, and return value explanation. It's well organized with clear separation for parameters and returns.

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 complexity of a full-replacement operation with dry_run and backup behavior, the description covers all necessary context: return values for both save and dry_run modes, prerequisites (admin token, storage-mode), and side effects (live browser updates).

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?

All three parameters are explained: url_path (default for default dashboard), config (complete new config with views list), dry_run (validate without saving). The description provides clear meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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's function: 'Replace a dashboard's full configuration'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_dashboard_config, restore_dashboard, and partial edit tools (add_card, update_card) by emphasizing it's a full, low-level replacement.

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?

Provides guidance on when to use: it's a low-level full replacement, warns about overwriting, mentions restore_dashboard for undo, and notes the storage-mode requirement. It implies partial edits should use other tools, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all alternatives.

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