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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the security boundary ('bounds dashboard data access'), what it does not grant, and required permissions. It reinforces the idempotentHint without contradicting the readOnly=false mutation expectation.

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 sentences, each carrying distinct value: action/timing, idempotency, and non-effects/permissions. There is no filler or restatement of structured schema data beyond the useful idempotency reinforcement.

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 two-UUID connection operation, it covers timing, prerequisites, idempotency, and non-effects; no output schema is needed for this mutation. The removal path is a clear sibling (disconnectPulseDataSource), so no additional context is missing for correct invocation.

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 schema only documents artifact_id, while the description supplies meaning for both parameters: queue_id must be an authorized same-team queue and artifact_id must reference a team-created Pulse. It does not spell out the parameter-name mapping, but the names make it obvious.

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 states a specific verb and resource: connecting an authorized same-team queue to a team-created Pulse before sampling. This precisely distinguishes it from detachPulseDataSource, attachPulseDashboardConnection, and listPulseDataSources.

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?

It clearly says when the action applies ('before sampling it') and lists the required permission and source access. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or a when-not-to-use condition, but the context is otherwise clear.

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