grafana_executar_consulta_painel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-then-execute flow against a data source but says nothing about permissions, whether the underlying data source is contacted, failure behavior when the panel has no query, or the effect of the default time range.

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?

It is a single short sentence, so nothing is wasted, but the leading '37.' list artifact is noise and the sentence is front-loaded with a number rather than the actionable verb-resource pairing. It is also terse to the point of under-specification.

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 values need not be explained, but for a 4-parameter tool with zero schema coverage the description leaves the time-range inputs, data source context, and invocation prerequisites completely unaddressed. It is not sufficient for an agent to call this confidently.

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% across 4 parameters. Only uid_dashboard and id_painel are implicitly hinted at by 'painel de dashboard'; the optional 'de'/'ate' time-range parameters (Grafana relative-time syntax by default) are given no explanation at all, and no valid format or default behavior is described.

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 verb pair (recuperar e executar) and the resource (consulta configurada em um painel de dashboard) are identifiable, so an agent can roughly tell this runs the query stored inside a panel. However, the description does not distinguish it from the many sibling query tools (grafana_executar_consulta, grafana_consultar_prometheus, grafana_renderizar_painel), and the stray numbering prefix '37.' adds no meaning.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this over grafana_executar_consulta (ad-hoc query) or grafana_renderizar_painel (render a panel), which are the closest alternatives. Usage can only be inferred from the phrase 'consulta configurada em um painel'.

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