List Dashboards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return scope (classic/studio dashboards) and the metadata fields, but does not mention pagination behavior, permission requirements, or performance implications (e.g., the 'count' parameter default for performance). The description is informative but not fully transparent about edge behaviors.

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, with the action stated upfront. Every phrase earns its place: it names the target, the scope, and the key return fields without redundancy or filler.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description provides a clear list of return metadata and the scope. It does not mention filtering or pagination in the description, but the schema covers those. The description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's primary function and expectations.

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 100%, with each of the 8 parameters having a meaningful description. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List dashboards in Splunk') and distinguishes the scope (Simple XML and Dashboard Studio). It clearly differentiates from sibling list tools like list_indexes and list_apps by naming the resource and even listing the metadata fields returned.

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 a listing use case but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_dashboard_definition (for a single dashboard's definition) or create_dashboard. No exclusion or comparison to sibling tools is given, leaving usage context implicit.

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