create_dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether a project/context is required, what happens to defaults like owner and layout, or what is returned on success.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded and free of filler. Its brevity is efficient rather than bloated, though it borders on under-specification for a create tool with three parameters.

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?

With a fully documented schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the minimum an agent needs is present. However, for a creation tool with no output schema, the description omits prerequisites (permissions, owning context) and any indication of the result, leaving gaps that neither annotations nor schema fill.

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%, including defaults for owner and layout and an enum for layout, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no syntax, format, or meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case.

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?

It states a verb (Create) and a resource (dashboard), so the operation is identifiable, but the sentence is essentially a restatement of the tool name with no scope, no field mention, and no differentiation from other create_* tools in the sibling list.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, when not to, prerequisites, or which alternative to prefer. The agent gets no routing information beyond the name itself.

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