create_dashboard

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation. The description adds a specific authorization need ('write permission') and the optional template behavior, which are useful beyond the annotations. It does not disclose response behavior or idempotency, but the annotation safety profile covers the main risks.

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, compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler and no repetition of schema content. It states the action, the key option, and the permission condition in roughly ten 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?

For a tool with seven parameters and no output schema, the schema carries the parameter detail while the description supplies the decision-relevant context: creation, template support, and authorization. It does not describe the return payload or template-cloning side effects, but those are reasonably inferable from the create action and the schema.

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%, and the input schema already documents name, group_id, sharable, template, template_path, and widget_tokens. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond noting that a template may be used, so it stays at the coverage-based baseline.

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 leads with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a dashboard.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_dashboard, delete_dashboard, and get_dashboards, and the optional template behavior adds precision beyond the tool name.

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 communicates the main precondition ('requires write permission') and makes the basic use case clear: creating a new dashboard. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over update_dashboard or how templates are produced, so the usage context is implied rather than fully stated.

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