get-dashboard-tile-chart-config

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses the two behaviors (saved vs dashboard-only) and the full list of returned configurations. It mentions partial matching support. No contradictions or hidden side effects described.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (introduction, returns, usage, parameters). Front-loaded with main purpose. Contains one minor typo ('a a chart' in second bullet of usage) but otherwise every sentence adds value.

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?

Given only two parameters, no output schema, and the tool's retrieval nature, the description is comprehensive. It explains the difference between chart types and lists all config components. Could mention error handling (e.g., tile not found) but overall sufficient.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal new meaning beyond schema: both parameters already have descriptions mentioning partial matching. The context of use is provided but doesn't significantly enhance the schema information.

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 clearly states it retrieves the complete chart configuration for a dashboard tile, distinguishing between saved charts and dashboard-only charts. It specifies the exact components returned (metricQuery, chartConfig, etc.) and separates from sibling tools like get-dashboard-tiles or get-chart-details.

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?

A 'When to use' section provides four explicit contexts (getting full details, understanding dashboard-only charts, exporting, before modifying). It implicitly differentiates from get-chart-details for saved charts, but could be more explicit about alternatives or when not to use.

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