dashboard.get_all_dashboards

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying the exact HTTP endpoint, the required elevated access, and the failure return shape ({'error': '...'}), which goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds useful information: what it does, which endpoint it calls, what access is required, and what the caller should expect on success or failure.

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, the description is complete. It names the endpoint, auth requirement, success return type, and error format. No output schema exists, so the description's return-value note is especially valuable.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to explain about parameters. The description instead clarifies the endpoint and return behavior, which is appropriate and sufficient.

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 the action ('Retrieve all dashboards from the Sisense server'), identifies the exact endpoint, and notes the elevated-access requirement. The word 'all' and the admin endpoint help distinguish it from sibling tools like dashboard_get_dashboards or dashboard_get_dashboard_by_id.

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 gives clear context for use: retrieving all dashboards via the admin endpoint, and it warns that elevated access is required. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the scope and access requirement provide sufficient practical guidance.

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