superset_update_dashboard

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the important partial-update behavior (only specified fields are changed), which is valuable. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, or impact on unspecified fields beyond the implication, leaving some ambiguity.

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 front-loads the core purpose and includes a key usage hint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be described. The description covers the operation, partial-update semantics, and example fields. It is sufficient for a simple update tool, though it could mention error conditions or side effects. Overall, it is complete enough for the complexity level.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions example fields (title, slug, published) which maps to dashboard_title, slug, and published in the schema, but the alias 'title' may cause slight confusion with dashboard_title. It does not explain the required dashboard_id, though that is self-evident. Adds some value but not full coverage.

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 ('Update an existing dashboard') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like superset_create_dashboard, superset_delete_dashboard, and especially superset_update_dashboard_filters, as it focuses on dashboard metadata fields rather than filters.

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 guideline 'Pass only the fields you want to change' provides clear usage context for partial updates. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose statement implicitly separates it from create/delete/get operations, making the intended use relatively clear.

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