Dashboards: mine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior: the fallback to the project default when the user has no dashboard, and the return format ('Returns JSON'). It does not describe pagination or error cases, but for a parameterless read tool that is a minor gap.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences, with the core purpose first and usage/return notes after. Slight redundancy between 'landing dashboard' and 'the dashboard you see first when you open the project,' but no sentence is wasted.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, fallback behavior, usage condition, sibling relationship, and return format. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless call by advising use 'when you don't have a dashboard id,' requiring no further argument documentation.

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 ('Get your landing dashboard, or the project default if you have none') and clarifies scope by likening the detail level to `dashboards_get`. An agent can distinguish this from dashboards_get and dashboards_list without opening another 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?

Provides an explicit selection condition ('Use it when you don't have a dashboard id') and names the sibling that governs the alternative behavior ('change which dashboard you land on with `dashboards_set_home`'). Nothing about when to pick this over its siblings is left to inference.

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