start_dashboard_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears behavioral transparency. It states that the server binds to localhost by default and that expose=true binds all interfaces with a security warning (plain HTTP, trusted network only). This discloses key behavioral traits but does not cover other aspects like authentication or logging.

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 concise (6 lines), front-loaded with the main purpose, and structured with a 'Use when' list. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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 tool's low complexity (3 optional params, no output schema), the description is nearly complete: it explains functionality, security note, and usage contexts. It does not describe the return value, but the agent can infer a URL or status message.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for host (default localhost) and expose (purpose and security context) but does not mention port or explain its default. Partially compensates but leaves a gap for port.

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 clearly states 'Starts a local web dashboard you can open in a browser', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes well from sibling tools, which are primarily audit, list, or analysis tools, not dashboard servers.

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 includes a 'Use when' section listing example user intents like 'Start the dashboard' and 'Share the dashboard with my team' with guidance on using expose=true. It provides context but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives, though sibling tools are unrelated.

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