Dashboards: create

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

Beyond the annotations' safety profile, it discloses the ownership model ('owned by you'), the visibility semantics ('visible only to you unless shared is set'), the auth gate on default ('administrators only'), the chart-id-to-widget mapping behavior, and that it returns JSON. This is substantive context annotations alone would not convey.

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?

Six short clauses, front-loaded with the core action, then ownership/visibility, then routing, then the admin caveat. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition.

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 8 params, full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers the meaningful gaps: prerequisites, ownership, sharing, and admin gating. The return value is only 'Returns JSON' with no output schema, a minor gap, but not one that would cause an incorrect call.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning beyond the schema: it explains that each chart id becomes a widget titled with the chart's name, and clarifies the shared/default interplay. It stops short of detailing the config JSON structure, which the schema already summarizes.

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+resource ('Create a dashboard') and immediately adds scope ('optionally with charts already on it'), which distinguishes it from dashboards_update and dashboards_add_chart. An agent can tell what this does without opening the schema.

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?

Routes explicitly to alternatives with conditions: 'add more later with dashboards_add_chart' and 'Build the charts first with charts_create'. It also flags the prerequisite for the default flag ('needs an administrator'), leaving little to inference.

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