get_dashboard_cards_as_images

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clarifies that the tool returns information about exportability, not actual images, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose read-only nature, authentication requirements, or any potential rate limits.

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 extremely concise, using just three clear sentences with a structured docstring format. No redundant information, every sentence adds value.

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 low complexity (single parameter, output schema exists), the description is largely complete. It mentions the return value structure adequately. Could add a note about being read-only, but overall sufficient for an agent to understand basic behavior.

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 0%, and the description merely restates the parameter name and type ('dashboard_id: The ID of the dashboard') without adding any additional meaning, format, or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'all card images from a dashboard', and further clarifies that it returns exportability information. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_dashboard_cards (which returns card metadata) and download_all_dashboard_cards (which downloads actual images).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or point to other tools like download_card_image for actual image retrieval.

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