ciso_assistant_api_metrology_dashboards_listLists metrology dashboards with pagination, search, label filtering, and ordering so you can review and manage dashboard data through the CISO Assistant API.
Override the list method to inject optimized data into the serializer context.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| folder | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| ordering | No | ||
| max_pages | No | ||
| filtering_labels | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no meaningful behavioral context beyond an internal note about serializer context injection, which is not useful to an agent invoking the 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?
The description is a single sentence, but it is an internal implementation note rather than a front-loaded explanation of the tool's function. Brevity without useful content leaves the agent under-informed.
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?
With 8 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and a description focused on serializer internals, the definition is not complete enough for an agent to confidently select or invoke the tool. The description fails to compensate for the schema coverage gap.
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 tool has 8 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description provides no explanation of any parameter. Terms like 'id', 'limit', 'folder', 'offset', 'search', 'ordering', 'max_pages', and 'filtering_labels' are left entirely undocumented.
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 says 'Override the list method to inject optimized data into the serializer context,' which describes an internal implementation detail rather than the tool's purpose. It does not clearly state that this lists metrology dashboards, so an agent must infer the purpose from the tool name alone.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling list/retrieve tool to choose instead. The description offers no usage context at all.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.