openpanel_list_dashboards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It does not state whether this is read-only, if there are pagination limits, rate limiting, or what the response structure contains. 'List all' implies no pagination/filtering but doesn't confirm this.

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 efficient sentence, avoiding verbosity. However, the '[UNIFIED]' tag at the beginning is structural noise that obscures the actual purpose. While brief, it is underspecified rather than optimally concise—essential parameter documentation is missing.

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 output schema and 0% input schema coverage, the description should explain parameters and hint at return values. It does neither. For a simple list operation, basic parameter semantics and safety confirmation (read-only) should be present but are absent.

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 coverage is 0% (neither 'site' nor 'project_id' have descriptions). The description mentions 'for a project' which hints at 'project_id', but provides zero explanation for 'site' (is it a domain? site ID? region?). With 0% coverage, the description fails to compensate adequately.

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 the basic action (List) and resource (dashboards) with scope (for a project), earning baseline clarity. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is unexplained metadata noise, and it fails to distinguish from sibling 'directus_list_dashboards' or explain what 'OpenPanel dashboards' specifically are compared to other services.

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 'openpanel_get_dashboard' (single retrieval), when to use 'directus_list_dashboards' instead, or prerequisites like authentication/permissions. The agent has no signals for selection beyond the name.

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