Get dashboard summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that this is an aggregate spanning multiple metric families, which is behavioral context beyond the safety flags. It still omits auth/permission needs and pagination behavior, but those are minor for a read-only aggregate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the data scope, then the usage guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 3-optional-param read-only aggregate with no output schema, the description supplies the key return contents (totals by network, plan usage, unread messages, accounts in error, failed posts) and usage guidance. Annotations cover the safety profile and schema covers parameter details, so the definition is complete enough to call 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and all three parameters (to_date, from_date, id_organization) are described in the schema. The description only adds that the call operates 'for a date range'; it provides no additional syntax, defaults, or filtering semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (aggregate) and resource (dashboard summary) with scope (date range) and enumerates the included metrics. Distinguishes itself from sibling metric-specific tools by positioning as the single call to answer 'how did this month go?'.

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?

Explicitly recommends using this call for monthly retrospectives and preferring it over stitching several tools together, which names the alternative approach. It does not state when not to use it, so not a full 5.

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