datadog_dashboard_list

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the output format (YAML) and the effect of the filter parameter, which is beyond what the schema provides. However, it does not mention pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameter explanation, and output format. No unnecessary words.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter) and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and output format. It does not mention pagination, but for a list tool this is acceptable. The sibling context is not needed for completeness.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage and already describes filter_shared. The description repeats this information concisely but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. The output format note does not pertain to parameters.

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 the tool lists Datadog dashboards with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions the optional filter parameter and output format, distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on other Datadog resources.

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 implies use for listing dashboards but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like datadog_dashboard_get or datadog_downtime_list. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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