get_card_dashboards

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states the read operation but omits potential issues like required permissions, what happens if the card doesn't exist, or return format. Minimal transparency for a retrieval tool.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could benefit from a bit more structure (e.g., listing output or preconditions) without sacrificing conciseness. Still efficient.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify the type of return value (list of dashboards), error handling, or pagination. It is minimally adequate but lacks completeness for an agent to confidently use.

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 0% for the top-level 'input' parameter, and the description merely rephrases 'a specific card' without explaining the id format or required structure. It adds little meaning beyond the schema's own property description ('The card ID').

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 retrieves dashboards containing a specific card, using a specific verb 'Get' and identifying the resource and filter. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_dashboard' (single dashboard) and 'get_cards_in_dashboards' (reverse direction).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_cards_in_dashboards' or 'list_dashboards'. It does not mention prerequisites, excluded cases, or context for usage.

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