search_dashboards

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds the match behavior (case-insensitive, partial, substring rather than exact), but says nothing about result limits, ordering, or empty-result handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the matching behavior is packed into the same clause as the purpose, and every word carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and annotations cover the safety profile. The only meaningful gap is routing guidance relative to list_dashboards and search_analyses, which a one-param read tool can arguably survive without.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'name' with an example. The description's 'case-insensitive partial match' adds matching semantics that the schema text does not state, but otherwise adds little beyond the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (QuickSight dashboards) plus the matching semantics (case-insensitive partial match on name). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling list_dashboards or search_analyses, leaving the agent to infer the choice.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'search' and the 'by name' qualifier; there is no explicit statement of when this is preferable to list_dashboards (exact enumeration) or search_analyses. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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