list_dashboards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that the tool runs through the Dynatrace Bridge browser extension in the user's logged-in browser, tells the agent to report errors rather than open tabs, and forbids browser automation. It does not explicitly state read-only semantics, but 'lists... visible to the user' implies it.

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?

Three short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, then the follow-up tool, then the runtime caveat. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description compensates by listing the returned fields, and the environment parameter's discovery path (dynatrace_bridge_status) is documented in the schema. Limit/pagination semantics live in the schema rather than the description, which is acceptable but leaves the description slightly short of fully self-contained.

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 100%, so the schema already documents text, limit and environment. The description repeats the `text` matching behavior (name, owner, tags) without adding syntax or format beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the Dynatrace dashboards visible to the user') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, owner, last modification, tags). It clearly differentiates itself from sibling get_dashboard by describing what that tool adds (tiles, metric selectors).

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?

Routes the agent explicitly to get_dashboard as the follow-up when tiles/metric selectors are needed, and explains how the `text` filter behaves. It gives clear usage context but no explicit when-not-to-use condition or a competing list-type sibling to avoid.

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