Get dashboard

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true annotations by disclosing that endpoint availability depends on account plan/API support, and by giving the exact HTTP method and path. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose and endpoint immediately; the second adds the critical availability caveat. No wasted words or repetition of schema content.

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 parameterless, read-only tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what is fetched, the endpoint, and a key constraint. A minor gap is that it does not hint at what the dashboard payload contains, but this is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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?

With zero parameters and an empty schema (100% coverage vacuously), the baseline is 4. The description's inclusion of the endpoint implicitly confirms that no input is required, which is all that can be expected here.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and a clear resource ('Kommo dashboard payload'), and includes the exact endpoint (GET /api/v4/dashboard). It is unmistakably distinct from the 100+ sibling tools, which target specific resources like leads, contacts, or pipelines.

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 provides a useful operational caveat ('Availability depends on account plan/API support') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. As the only dashboard-related tool among siblings, usage is implied rather than directly articulated.

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