Open Dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the main side effect—opening a web browser—and clarifies what the dashboard contains. It does not mention prerequisites like whether a local server must already be running, but for a benign, no-parameter action this is acceptable.

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 sentences with no filler: the first states the action and resource, the second states when to use it. The most important information is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple no-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what the dashboard contains, and when to invoke it. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and call it correctly.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds useful context about what the dashboard shows.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Open the local dashboard ... in a web browser.' It also enumerates the dashboard contents, making the tool's function unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like engine_status, which is about status rather than opening a UI.

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 gives an explicit use condition: 'Use when the user wants to configure engines or check quota.' It does not discuss when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the intended context is clear and sufficient for this no-parameter action.

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