create_dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that chart visuals are standalone artifacts until placed in a dashboard, warns that deleting a dashboard deletes all linked visuals, and explains automatic tiling behavior. This is comprehensive.

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 reasonably concise with a clear structure: main purpose, usage guidance, parameter details, warnings, and an example workflow. It could be slightly shorter, but every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description provides complete context: preconditions (create_smart_visual first), warnings, parameter semantics, and return value. The example workflow ties it all together.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains each parameter in detail: visual_ids (order, recording IDs), workspace_id (source), dataset_id (optional, use shared), description (optional). Adds critical context like 'record these IDs' for deletion warning.

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 ('Create a CDV dashboard') and the resource ('groups one or more chart visuals into a single visible view'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_smart_visual by explicitly stating it should be used after that tool.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('after create_smart_visual()') and provides an example workflow. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it, the guidance is clear and contextual.

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