replace_dashboard_view

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'replace' but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive to the prior view, what happens if view_index is out of range, or whether permissions are required. For a mutation tool this is a significant transparency gap.

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 front-loaded sentence with no waste, which is structurally clean. But it is arguably too sparse for a three-parameter mutation tool, so brevity here borders on under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, 0% schema description coverage, and a nested object parameter, the description is far too thin to be complete. An agent lacks the information needed to call this correctly with confidence.

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 there are three required parameters, including a nested, unconstrained 'view' object. The description alludes to 'index' and 'view' but adds no meaning for url_path, the index base/range, or the expected view structure, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 (replace) and resource (view at an index), which distinguishes it from append_dashboard_view and delete_dashboard_view. However, it never mentions that the view belongs to a dashboard identified by url_path, nor does it differentiate itself explicitly from the sibling replace_dashboard_card. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus append_dashboard_view, delete_dashboard_view, or replace_dashboard_card, and no prerequisites (e.g., the view index must already exist) are stated. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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