update_dashboard_cards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the critical destructive behavior: 'Cards not in payload are removed.' This is a key transparency point. However, it does not mention error states, permission requirements, or impact on card ordering/tabs, which would strengthen transparency.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler, front-loaded with the purpose. Every word serves a purpose, and the critical behavioral note is included without extra text.

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 complex bulk operation with nested parameters, the description covers the essential behavioral impact (card removal). The schema details the parameters. However, the lack of output schema and absence of guidance on error handling or ordering leaves minor gaps. Still, it is largely complete given the complexity.

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 description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what is already in the input schema. The schema itself provides decent property descriptions for each field (e.g., 'id', 'col', 'row'). Since schema coverage is effectively high from the schema's own descriptions, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'update' and resource 'dashboard cards' with the scope 'bulk'. It also mentions a version constraint (v0.49+). This effectively distinguishes it from siblings like 'add_dashboard_card', 'remove_dashboard_card', and 'update_dashboard_card' by implying it handles multiple cards at once.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus its sibling 'update_dashboard_card' (singular). It does not state prerequisites, scenarios where removal is undesirable, or alternative approaches. The agent is left to infer usage from the bulk nature.

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