Open ThreadKeeper dashboard

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the dashboard is portable and "display-only", and invocation depends on host capability, so the agent knows not to expect mutation or data retrieval. It does not say what happens if the host lacks support or whether an app handle is returned, though the output schema covers the return side.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence led by the action verb, with no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 no-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers the important agent-facing fact, the MCP Apps host prerequisite. Only the fallback behavior on unsupported hosts is left unstated, a minor gap given the otherwise complete structured data.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline for a no-parameter tool 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?

States a concrete verb and resource: "Open the ... status dashboard", with qualifiers "portable, display-only" that signal it is a UI surface rather than a data query. It is clear what the tool does, but it never distinguishes itself from sibling dashboards such as mp_dashboard or live_status, so an agent cannot fully disambiguate on the description alone.

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?

Provides an explicit eligibility condition: use it "when the host supports MCP Apps", which implicitly says not to call it otherwise. It stops short of naming alternatives for hosts that lack MCP Apps support or for agents that just want dashboard data, so the guidance is clear but incomplete.

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