create_terminal_dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the desescription must carry the full burden. It conveys that the tool draws a text dashboard, but does not disclose output format, rendering behavior, failure modes, or any side effects, which is a significant gap for a 9-parameter tool.

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, short sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 tool with 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is far too sparse. It does not explain parameter usage, output behavior, or when to choose this over the many sibling visualization tools, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it 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 description coverage is only 22%, and the description does not explain the meaning or format of key parameters like panels, theme, width, height, or raw_output. It only implies that multiple panels are involved, which is insufficient for an agent to construct valid arguments.

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 a specific action ('draws') and resource ('text dashboard for console') and highlights the multi-panel aspect, which helps distinguish it from single-chart siblings. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from closely related siblings like create_combined_dashboard or create_terminal_chart.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_line_chart or create_combined_dashboard. The desciption only describes the action at a high level and leaves all usage decisions up to the agent.

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