get_security_dashboard

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

Annotations indicate read-only and open-world. Description adds specifics about returned metrics and the optional days parameter. No contradictions. Describes behavior beyond annotations by listing the dashboard components.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose and key metrics without extraneous information. Front-loaded with core action.

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?

No output schema exists, so description must explain return content. It does so adequately: open incidents by severity, vulnerability counts, mean time to resolve. For a dashboard tool with one optional parameter, this is complete.

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% with one parameter. Description mentions the 'days' parameter but does not add new meaning beyond the schema's description. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves a security posture dashboard with specific metrics (open incidents by severity, vulnerability counts, mean time to resolve). This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_security_incident' or 'get_vulnerability' which return single records.

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?

Usage context is implied by the dashboard nature and sibling names, but no explicit 'when to use' or 'alternatives' guidance is provided. Agent must infer that this is for aggregate overview rather than individual records.

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