get_dashboard

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it reveals the tool returns resource counts, failing pods, unhealthy workloads, Warning events, and Helm release status. No contradictions.

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 concise (a few sentences) and front-loaded with the primary use case. The routing guidance is efficiently listed. Every sentence contributes value, though it could be slightly tighter.

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 has only one optional parameter, no output schema, and comprehensive notes on usage and routing, the description sufficiently covers all needed context for agent selection and invocation.

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 100% schema coverage and one parameter 'namespace' already documented, the description adds extra context: 'Use namespace for app-local triage; omit it when the root may be cluster-scoped.' This helps the agent decide when to provide the parameter.

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 is for 'inventory-style cluster or namespace health triage', mimicking 'kubectl get all' with added problems and warnings. It lists specific outputs (resource counts, failing pods, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings like get_resource, logs, and search via explicit routing.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use for inventory-style cluster or namespace health triage' and detailed routing: 'unknown broken thing -> issues; content/name search -> search; service routing/dependencies -> get_topology or get_neighborhood; inventory/counts/Helm/events overview -> get_dashboard.' Also advises on namespace filtering.

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