Get Dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds the shape of the result (title, description, panels) and the space targeting/default, which is modest extra context, but nothing on failure modes or scoping 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and the result contents, then the one parameter note that needs explanation. No filler, no redundancy with the schema.

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 read-only single-resource getter with an output schema present, the definition covers purpose, result content, and the space-scoping default. The only real gap is that dashboard_id semantics rest entirely on its name, which is low risk here.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It fully explains `space` (a Kibana space id, defaulting to the default space), which is the non-obvious parameter, but says nothing about `dashboard_id` beyond implying it identifies the dashboard. Partial compensation only.

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 pairs a specific verb (Get) with a specific resource (dashboard) and even enumerates the return content (title, description, panels). It is clearly distinguished in kind from create_dashboard/search_dashboards by name and phrasing, though it never explicitly names a sibling to contrast with.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: fetching a single dashboard by id is evident from the name and the summary language, but there is no explicit 'use this instead of search_dashboards when…' routing or any precondition. Adequate but leaves the agent to infer when this tool is preferable.

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