get_dashboard_from_api

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

The description does not add behavioral information beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description repeats that data is from an API but does not disclose additional traits like rate limits or caching behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds necessary context.

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 the simple parameter set and annotations covering safety and idempotence, the description provides enough context to understand the return value scope. No output schema exists, but the description hints at the data returned. Could mention pagination or format, but overall sufficient.

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 input schema has one optional parameter (network) with 100% coverage. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 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?

The description explicitly states it retrieves the JustLend protocol dashboard from an API and lists specific protocol-level statistics it returns (total supply, total borrow, TVL, etc.). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_wallet_address or get_market_data which serve different purposes.

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?

The description implies use for fetching overall protocol metrics but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative tools like get_protocol_summary or get_all_markets. No guidance on context or exclusions is provided.

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