tokportal_get_analytics_dashboard

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 description need not repeat these. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context, such as whether the dashboard aggregates across accounts or platforms, or what filters affect the result. A 3 is appropriate as annotations handle safety profile but description misses useful nuance.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded. However, it is slightly under-specified given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, many siblings), warranting a 4 rather than a 5.

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 no output schema, the description should indicate what the response contains (e.g., metrics, charts, aggregated data). It also does not address the meaning of each filter parameter or how the dashboard is scoped. For a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, this description is incomplete.

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 has 100% description coverage, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., 'Repeatable account filter.'). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is correct. The description could have clarified how filters interact (e.g., AND vs OR) but that is not required.

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 'Get analytics dashboard' uses a clear verb and resource, indicating the tool retrieves an analytics dashboard. However, it lacks specificity about what the dashboard contains (e.g., metrics, visualizations) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like tokportal_get_account_analytics or tokportal_get_analytics_account, which also retrieve analytics data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tokportal_get_analytics_series or tokportal_export_analytics_report_html. It does not specify prerequisites, expected context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate, making it hard for an agent to decide correctly.

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