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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds the live-connector prerequisite, the not_connected error, and the exact set of returned fields (connector_type, items, total, message, labels, discovery) — all beyond the structured metadata.

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 front-loads the purpose and then packs only high-value operational details into a short paragraph; every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, it is complete: goal, object kinds, prerequisite, failure mode, sibling alternative, and returned fields are all covered.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter connector_id is already documented as coming from list_connectors. The description reinforces 'saved connector' but adds no new format, constraints, or usage semantics beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('one saved connector'), enumerates the kind of exposed assets (files, tables, endpoints, items), and distinguishes itself from preview_browse_connector by limiting to saved connectors.

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 gives an explicit precondition (connector must be live; run test_connector first), states the failure mode (not_connected), and points to the exact alternative for unsaved inline definitions (preview_browse_connector).

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