org_dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'shows' is consistent. Adds value by disclosing the limitation of free preview (3 agents), but no further behavioral details like rate limits or data freshness.

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?

Two concise sentences. First sentence covers purpose and data content. Second sentence adds usage context. No filler; front-loaded with key 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?

Adequately covers purpose and limitations for a simple read-only dashboard with one parameter. Could be improved by briefly noting output format or what 'shows' implies (e.g., returns aggregated data).

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% (one parameter with description). The description does not mention the parameter, so it adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'shows' and resource 'org-wide multi-agent dashboard' with specific data points (active agents, gate decisions, adherence rates, risk agents, top blocked gates). Differentiates from sibling 'dashboard' by emphasizing 'org-wide' and 'multi-agent' scope.

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 context on visibility based on rollout type ('Team rollout: full visibility. Free preview: limited to 3 agents'), which guides usage scope. However, does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use.

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