get_team_dashboard

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

The description explains it combines three views (top active, top blocked, summary stats) but does not mention permissions, data freshness, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, and it falls short of fully disclosing behavior.

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 short introductory sentence followed by a well-structured parameter list in docstring format. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose and parameters adequately but lacks guidance on when to use this vs. similar siblings, slightly reducing completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining each parameter (e.g., project: short name, active_limit: top N active). However, exclude_patterns is only briefly described as 'comma-separated regex to exclude' without specifying what is being excluded.

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 it provides a 'combined dashboard' with 'top active, top blocked, and summary stats' for a project, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_top_active_issues or get_multi_team_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 implies it is for a single project dashboard but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_top_blocked_issues or get_multi_team_dashboard. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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