Dashboards: delete

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond that: widgets are destroyed but charts are preserved, the removal affects everyone who can see it, and a deleted home dashboard falls back to the project default. This is exactly the impact detail an agent needs before a destructive call.

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?

Impact and routing information is front-loaded in tight sentences, with the destructive warning last where it belongs. 'Returns JSON' is low-value filler that keeps it from a 5.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers blast radius, sibling routing, and the home-dashboard edge case. The only thin spot is the vague 'Returns JSON' in place of any return-value detail, which is minor given no output schema exists.

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?

There is a single id parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself pointing to dashboards_list for discovery. The description adds no syntax or format detail for id, so the baseline 3 for a fully documented schema 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a dashboard') and immediately clarifies scope with 'and its widgets. The charts on it are kept.' An agent can distinguish this from charts_delete and dashboards_remove_widget without opening any 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?

Explicitly names the alternatives and the conditions that select them: use dashboards_remove_widget to take one chart off, charts_delete to delete a chart itself. It also states the correct precondition ('check with the user before running it') for a destructive operation.

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