run_dashcard_query

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention whether the query returns results, if it is read-only, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. The description lacks necessary behavioral context.

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 that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no superfluous words and is easy to parse.

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 lack of annotations and absence of an output schema, the description fails to provide essential context about return values, error conditions, or how this tool fits within the larger set of dashboard/card query tools. The schema covers parameter details, but behavioral completeness is lacking.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all parameters (card_id, parameters, dashcard_id, dashboard_id), so schema coverage is high. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, thus meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'Run the query for a specific card on a dashboard in Metabase', using a specific verb and identifying the resource. However, it does not distinguish from closely related sibling tools like 'execute_dashboard_card_query' or 'run_embed_dashcard_query', which have similar purposes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'execute_card' for standalone cards or 'execute_dashboard_card_query' for dashboard card queries. There are no prerequisites or context for appropriate usage.

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