list_group_dashboards

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and adds valuable behavioral detail: no paging support, always returns all records, page/per_page will be null, and insufficient permissions yield 403. It does not literally say 'read-only' but '取得' strongly implies a safe GET-like operation.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence addresses a distinct concern: tenant acquisition, permissions, and paging. There is minor redundancy with the schema's tenant_id description, but overall the structure is efficient and scannable.

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?

For a single-parameter list operation, the description covers prerequisites, permission failure, and pagination behavior. There is no output schema, and the description does not describe response fields; however, enough information is present to invoke the tool correctly.

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 only parameter, tenant_id, is already well described in the input schema with type UUID and source via list_tenants. The description repeats this guidance without adding meaningful new semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description opens with '現場用ダッシュボードの一覧を取得します', naming a specific verb and resource. It clearly identifies a read/list operation and is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_formats and export_observation_data.

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?

Explicitly instructs that tenant_id should be obtained via list_tenants and states the required permission levels with 403 behavior. It gives clear context for valid invocation, though it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool versus an alternative.

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