usage_dashboard_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, whether it creates or modifies resources, what auth implications the api_key parameter has, or what the response looks like. 'Generate' implies some action but provides no concrete behavioral details.

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 brief, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The single vague clause does not provide enough substance to earn its place as a complete tool definition.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is not complete enough for correct invocation. It omits auth behavior, output shape, parameter nuances, and any differentiation from related analytics or dashboard tools.

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 only 50%, and the description adds almost no parameter-level meaning. 'Aggregation and time-series queries' loosely maps to metrics and granularity, but api_key and retention_days are not addressed, and the description does not clarify required formats, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema already states.

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 says 'Generate usage analytics data endpoints,' which is ambiguous about whether this tool retrieves analytics data or generates code/endpoints. It does not clearly distinguish the tool from siblings like usage_tracker or grafana_generate_dashboard, and 'data endpoints' is not a concrete resource.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention related siblings, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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