create_dashboard

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

The description confirms a write operation ('Create'), which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint: false). It does not add behavioral details beyond the annotation, such as permission requirements or side effects. Since annotations already disclose the non-read-only nature, this is adequate but not enriched.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and no wasted words. Every phrase adds value, covering purpose and use cases efficiently.

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 create tool with full schema parameter descriptions and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and use cases, leaving no critical gaps.

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?

All 5 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb+resource: 'Create a new Metabase dashboard.' It then provides specific use cases ('build new analytical views, organize related cards, or establish monitoring interfaces'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_dashboards and get_dashboard that are read-only.

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?

Provides clear contexts for use ('build new analytical views, organize related cards, or establish monitoring interfaces'), implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving differentiation to the sibling tool names.

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