redash-mcp

create_dashboard

Destructive

Create a new empty Redash dashboard and return its ID, name, and slug so you can populate it with charts via add_widget.

Instructions

Create a new, empty dashboard. Behavior: creates the dashboard and returns its id, name, and slug. Usage: after creating it, populate it with charts using add_widget, passing visualization ids obtained from get_query or create_visualization. To list or inspect existing dashboards instead, use list_dashboards / get_dashboard.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_dashboard"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Display name for the new dashboard

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv3.2.0Jul 12, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Previous value: -"Dashboard name"New value: +"Display name for the new dashboard"
```
First observedv0.1.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description presents a purely additive operation ('Create a new, empty dashboard') and says it returns id, name, and slug, but the annotation declares destructiveHint=true. No destructive behavior is described, so the definition gives conflicting signals about the tool's safety profile.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return behavior, then workflow and alternatives. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has low complexity, one parameter, and no output schema. The description supplies the return fields and the immediate follow-up workflow, so it is complete enough for correct invocation apart from the annotation mismatch.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single required `name` parameter, so the schema already explains its meaning. The description adds no further parameter semantics or constraints, which matches the baseline of 3 when the schema carries the full burden.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new, empty dashboard.' It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools for listing and inspecting dashboards, so an agent can tell what it does and what it is not for.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit workflow guidance: create the dashboard, then populate it with charts via add_widget using visualization ids from get_query or create_visualization. It also names list_dashboards and get_dashboard as alternatives when the goal is listing or inspecting rather than creating.

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