delete_dashboard_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Delete' signals a destructive/irreversible mutation, but nothing is said about persistence, permission requirements, or whether removing a card reindexes subsequent cards – all important for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler and the key action front-loaded. Its brevity is not the problem; the missing detail is, which is penalized elsewhere.

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 3-required-param destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description supplies almost nothing. An agent cannot confidently invoke it without knowing what url_path, view_index, and card_index refer to.

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% and the description adds no parameter meaning. It gestures at 'card' and 'view', loosely mapping to card_index and view_index, but never explains index base (0-based?), whether url_path is a dashboard identifier, or valid ranges.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (card from a view), which is enough to distinguish it from append_dashboard_card and replace_dashboard_card. It stops short of naming the sibling it complements or clarifying scope beyond 'a view'.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. needing the dashboard config loaded), and no reference to alternatives like replace_dashboard_card or delete_dashboard_view. The agent must infer context entirely from the name.

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