list_dashboards

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It signals a read operation and enumerates the returned fields (url_path, title, mode, icon), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, side effects, or whether results are paginated or cached.

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 tightly-scoped sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and the returned-field parenthetical giving immediate value. Nothing is wasted.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and enumerates the four returned fields, which is exactly the information an agent needs. Only the lack of any pagination/volume expectation keeps it from being fully 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?

The schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The listed fields refer to the response shape rather than inputs, which is harmless extra context.

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 ('List') and resource ('Lovelace dashboard') and even names the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It is implicitly distinguishable from siblings like get_dashboard_config, create_dashboard, and update_dashboard_metadata, but it never explicitly draws that contrast.

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?

'List every' implies enumeration of the full set with no filtering, which implicitly tells the agent when this applies versus a targeted get_* call. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of alternatives such as get_dashboard_config for a single dashboard's detail, and no prerequisites.

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