connects_dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the description is not responsible for safety disclosure. The word 'personalized' adds minimal context about user-specific output, but there is no additional behavior detail such as whether login is required or how the discovery recommendations are produced. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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. It front-loads the key domain ('IE Connects') and the general resource, though it leaves the ambiguous 'or' construction and lacks additional useful context.

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 read-only tool with one optional enum parameter and an output schema, the description is near the minimum viable level. It fails to clarify the meaning of the view parameter or how 'discovery recommendations' relates to the dashboard, so an agent will have partial information when selecting and invoking the tool.

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 should compensate by explaining the view parameter; it does not mention view at all. The enum values are somewhat self-explanatory, and 'dashboard' matches one value, but the description does not clarify what categories, groups, people, events, or popular views return or how 'discovery recommendations' maps to them.

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 identifies the resource as the IE Connects dashboard or discovery recommendations and adds 'personalized,' but it is a noun phrase with no explicit verb and does not clarify whether the tool renders a dashboard, returns recommendations, or both. It is too vague to strongly differentiate from sibling tools like connects_feed or connects_activity.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as blackboard_dashboard, careers_dashboard, or the other connects_* tools. The description gives no context about the intended use case, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and enums.

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