save_lovelace_dashboard

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the overwrite behavior and notes that the raw HA response envelope is returned, allowing inspection of success. It could mention potential destructive consequences or authentication needs, but the core behavior is clear.

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 concise: three sentences (including the Args section) with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter documentation is compact yet informative.

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 tool has 2 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and a nested config object, the description is complete. It explains both parameters, the return value, and refers to a companion tool for obtaining the config. No additional information is necessary for correct usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: config is described as 'the complete dashboard config dict (as returned by get_lovelace_dashboard)', and url_path is explained as 'Dashboard slug, or None for Overview'. This significantly aids understanding 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 states 'Save (overwrite) an entire Lovelace dashboard config' — a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_lovelace_dashboard (retrieval) and get_lovelace_view (view-specific).

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?

The description provides clear context: it explains that the config should be the complete dict as returned by get_lovelace_dashboard, and that url_path can be a slug or None for Overview. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternative mutation tools.

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