list_tenant_dashboards

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: required permission levels, the 403 error for insufficient permissions, and the fact that pagination is unsupported so all records are always returned with page/per_page null.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose. Each subsequent sentence adds distinct value: parameter sourcing, permissions, error behavior, and pagination behavior. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only list endpoint, the description covers the essential operational facts: purpose, parameter source, permission requirements, error case, and pagination behavior. It does not describe the shape or fields of returned dashboards, but this is not critical for correctly invoking the tool and no output schema exists to supplement it.

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 100% and the schema already documents tenant_id as a UUID obtainable from list_tenants. The description repeats this guidance without adding additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb '取得します' (retrieve) and the exact resource 'テナント用ダッシュボードの一覧' (list of tenant dashboards). The resource scope clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_device_dashboards and list_group_dashboards.

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 description gives clear context by explaining that tenant_id should be obtained from list_tenants and specifying required permission levels. It does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool, so it misses a full 5.

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