dashboard.get_dashboard_by_id

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

Beyond the readOnly/destructive annotations, the description discloses the exact HTTP request, the response shape, and the failure contract: it returns an error dict when the request fails or no dashboard is found. It does not cover authorization details or rate limits, but it adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the 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 two compact sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded, followed by the endpoint and return contract. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary restatement of the tool name.

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 one-parameter read-only GET with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies the endpoint, the success return shape, and the error behavior. No critical call-time detail is missing.

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%, and the schema already says dashboard_id is 'The oid of the dashboard to retrieve.' The description's endpoint template confirms the parameter's role but adds no substantially new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a specific dashboard by its ID.' It also provides the exact GET endpoint, making its scope unambiguous and differentiating it from siblings like dashboard_get_all_dashboards and dashboard_get_dashboards.

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 the correct usage context: call this when you already have a dashboard ID and need one specific dashboard. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or give when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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