Update Dashboard Panel

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond 'update by id'—it does not clarify partial-vs-full update semantics, what happens to omitted attributes, or any preconditions despite the complex nested payload.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. Its brevity is appropriate structurally, though it leaves gaps addressed under other dimensions.

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?

The output schema and annotations carry much of the burden, and the input schema details the required id and data shape. Still, for a mutation tool with a complex nested payload, the description does not explain update semantics or constraints sufficiently to be fully complete on its own.

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 only 50%, and the description mentions just the id parameter, which the schema already documents in detail. It says nothing about the required 'data' object or the semantics of nested attributes such as params, datasets, and position, failing to compensate for the schema 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource: 'Update a specific dashboard panel by id.' This clearly distinguishes it from read/list siblings such as get_dashboard_panel and list_dashboards. It does not explicitly contrast with update_dashboard, so it falls 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_dashboard or get_dashboard_panel. It provides only implied usage from the tool name and a bare statement of operation.

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