get_dashboard_widgets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' clearly implies a read-only retrieval, and the phrase 'with their details and IDs' conveys the response contents. However, it does not explicitly confirm side-effect-free behavior, nor does it address edge cases like empty dashboards or invalid GUIDs.

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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with zero wasted words. It efficiently covers what the tool does and what it returns.

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 single-parameter retriever with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies the input implicitly through the schema and states that the output includes widget details and IDs. It does not describe the exact shape of widgets or whether pagination is involved, but the tool's simplicity and the existence of related tools make this gap minor.

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 100%, with the sole parameter dashboard_guid described as 'Dashboard GUID to get widgets from'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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?

The description uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (all widgets from a dashboard), clearly distinguishing it from mutation siblings like add_widget_to_dashboard, update_widget, and delete_widget. It also explicitly states the return content (details and IDs), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage: if you need widgets from a dashboard, this is the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention that the dashboard_guid likely comes from get_dashboards. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance remains implicit.

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