conduyt_delete_dashboard

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does well on the most important trait for a delete — cascade behavior: tiles are destroyed, saved reports are not. But it says nothing about irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens on an unknown/invalid id, so it is only partially sufficient for a destructive unannotated tool.

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?

One front-loaded sentence plus a tight parenthetical that carries real information about scope. Zero filler; every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description covers the essential cascade semantics, but without annotations a destructive operation should still mention irreversibility or confirmation and clarify where the id comes from. Adequate, not complete.

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 0%, so the single 'id' parameter (uuid) is documented nowhere. The description only implies the id identifies the dashboard to delete and adds no format, sourcing, or error semantics to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb+resource: "Delete a dashboard". The parenthetical clarifies the blast radius (tiles go with it) and what survives (saved reports stay), which distinguishes it from conduyt_update_dashboard, conduyt_remove_dashboard_tile, and conduyt_run_dashboard. No sibling is named explicitly, so it stops just short of a 5.

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 only implied by the verb 'delete'. It never states prerequisites, permissions, or when to prefer the narrower conduyt_remove_dashboard_tile instead of nuking the whole dashboard. The note that saved reports persist hints at scope boundaries but is not an explicit routing rule.

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