grafana_obter_dashboard

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. 'Recuperar' implies a read-only operation, but nothing is said about required permissions, behavior on a missing or invalid UID, or the potentially large payload of a full dashboard JSON definition.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. However, it opens with a stray ordinal fragment ('2.') left over from a list, which is noise that does not belong in a tool definition.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter) and an output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not needed. The remaining gap is sibling disambiguation against the other dashboard-retrieval tools, which the description never addresses.

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% and the single 'uid' property has no description, but the tool description compensates partially by specifying that the UID identifies the dashboard ('pelo seu UID'). That establishes meaning, though not format constraints (UID syntax, whether a slug or numeric ID is accepted).

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Recuperar a definição JSON completa de um dashboard') plus the lookup key (UID), which is concrete and actionable. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as grafana_obter_resumo_dashboard, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which of the two retrieval tools fits a given need.

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 tool versus grafana_obter_resumo_dashboard (summarized version) or grafana_listar_dashboards (discovery). The word 'completa' hints at a full-versus-summary distinction, but the agent is left to infer it and receives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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