get_dashboard_tile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries all behavioral disclosure. It minimally states it 'gets' a tile but does not describe side effects, permissions, or whether it returns an image. The description is too brief to adequately inform the agent.

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, no unnecessary words, and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 multiple coordinate parameters and no output schema, the description lacks crucial details such as return type (image?), coordinate system, and required context (e.g., dashboard_id must refer to an existing dashboard). This leaves the agent with insufficient information to invoke correctly.

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?

Despite the input schema having descriptions for each nested property, the context indicates 0% schema coverage, meaning those descriptions are not counted. The tool description adds no insight into parameters; it only mentions 'dashboard card'. The description fails to explain the meaning or usage of zoom, x, y coordinates.

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 action (Get) and resource (a map tile for a dashboard card in Metabase). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_card_tile or get_embed_dashboard_tile, which also retrieve tiles but in different contexts.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many similar tile-getting siblings (get_card_tile, get_public_dashboard_tile, etc.), explicit usage context is missing.

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