openpanel_create_dashboard

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It identifies the mutation type ('Create') but provides no information about side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or what happens to existing dashboards. Significant behavioral gaps remain.

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 single sentence is efficiently structured and front-loaded, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be technical metadata unexplained to the agent. For a 4-parameter tool with zero schema documentation, the description is content-light to the point of under-specification.

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?

Given 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the single-sentence description is inadequate. It omits parameter explanations, return value details, and differentiation from non-OpenPanel dashboard tools (e.g., Directus) available in the same environment.

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%, requiring the description to compensate for undocumented parameters. It completely fails to explain the 4 parameters (site, project_id, name, description) or their relationships, leaving critical inputs like 'site' and 'project_id' without semantic 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?

The description states a clear action (Create) and resource (dashboard) with the modifier 'custom' adding specificity. However, it fails to distinguish from sibling tool directus_create_dashboard or mention the OpenPanel context, relying solely on the tool name prefix for differentiation.

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 guidance provided on when to use this versus alternatives like openpanel_duplicate_dashboard, or prerequisites such as requiring an existing project_id. The description only states what the tool does, not when to invoke it.

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