create_dashboard

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful context about the 24-column grid layout, the unique 'key' mapping requirement, and the available panel types, which are important behavioral constraints beyond the basic 'create' action. It does not cover return format or permission requirements, but the presence of an output schema mitigates the return gap.

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 primary purpose. Every sentence earns its place: the first states the action, the second explains the essential grid layout rule, and the third lists the supported panel types. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 tool with 9 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the main complexity (grid positioning, panel types) but does not mention default behaviors (e.g., time range default, refresh interval options) or validation rules. The presence of a complete schema and output schema fills most gaps, making this sufficiently 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 description coverage is 100%, so all nine parameters already have meaningful descriptions. The tool description reiterates the grid layout and panel types, which partially overlaps with parameters like layout_json and panels_json, but does not add substantial new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 opens with 'Create a new dashboard with panels, layout, and variables', which clearly specifies the verb (create), resource (dashboard), and scope (panels, layout, variables). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_dashboard, get_dashboard, list_dashboards, and delete_dashboard.

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 clearly implies this tool is for creating a new dashboard, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it instead of alternatives (e.g., update_dashboard for modifying existing dashboards). Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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