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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description's 'Get' verb is consistent with a read-only operation. The description does not add extra behavioral details, but given the annotation, it is sufficient. No contradiction 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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, making it easy to parse.

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?

The description gives a basic idea of the tool's function, but it does not elaborate on the output format or provide usage context relative to other status-related tools. For a simple read-only status endpoint, this may be sufficient, but it leaves some ambiguity.

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 provides a description for the connector_id parameter ('UUID of the connector'), so the parameter semantics are already covered. The description does not add additional context about the parameter, maintaining a neutral but adequate level.

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 the tool retrieves connector status and recent executions, using a specific verb and resource. It is concise and unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like connector_discover_status.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It lacks any conditions or scenarios for selection, leaving the agent without contextual hints for tool choice.

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