Get MITRE ATT&CK dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'coverage heatmap' to clarify the data nature but does not disclose return format, filtering behavior, or how the optional 'query' parameter affects results. This is a minimal addition beyond 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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. There is zero wasted text, and the parenthetical 'coverage heatmap' adds useful specificity. It is appropriately concise for the tool's apparent simplicity.

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?

Despite having only one parameter, the parameter is completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving a significant gap. There is no output schema, so the description should explain at least the general shape of the return value. The phrase 'coverage heatmap' hints at output but does not cover parameter usage or response structure. Given the low complexity, a complete description would provide query usage examples or a link to API docs.

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 input schema has one parameter 'query' with zero description coverage, and the description does not mention it. The agent has no guidance on what keys or values to provide in the 'query' object, making parameter usage essentially undocumented. The description provides no compensatory information.

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 tool retrieves MITRE ATT&CK dashboard data with a specific qualifier of 'coverage heatmap'. This is a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('MITRE ATT&CK dashboard data'), which distinguishes it from other dashboard tools in the sibling list.

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 usage is implied by the name and description: use this to get MITRE ATT&CK coverage data. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over other dashboard-like siblings (e.g., advanced_get_dashboard, platform_score_by_control), nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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