list_all_dashboards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'find a specific dashboard' hint (matching filter_query) but no additional behavioral details like pagination or limits, which are covered by the schema. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundancy. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple listing tool with optional parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, this description is adequate. It covers the purpose and use case without needing to explain return values (output schema exists). It could be slightly more complete by naming alternatives, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% coverage of both parameters (limit and filter_query) with descriptions and defaults. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'find a specific dashboard,' which aligns with filter_query. Since schema covers everything, a baseline 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 tool's purpose: 'Browse all Datadog dashboards.' It specifies the resource (dashboards) and the action (browse/list), and the second sentence clarifies the use case: seeing what exists or finding a specific one. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_dashboard_details, create_new_dashboard, and update_existing_dashboard.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when: want to see what dashboards exist or find a specific dashboard.' This provides clear context for when to invoke the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the siblings list implies such distinctions.

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