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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds that it lists destination connections with examples, which aligns with the annotation. No contradictions. However, it does not go beyond the annotation to disclose additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination limits, rate limits).

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 two sentences: first covers purpose and examples, second adds HTTP path. It is concise with no filler. Could potentially omit the second sentence without losing core meaning, but it does not harm and adds brief 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 list tool with no output schema and full parameter schema descriptions, the description adequately explains what the tool lists and gives examples. It does not detail the return format (e.g., array of destination objects), but this is implied. Sufficient for typical use.

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 input schema has 100% coverage: both parameters 'page' and 'per_page' are described in schema. The tool description does not add extra parameter semantics beyond what is in the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists 'configured destination connections' with explicit examples (Salesforce, HubSpot, Marketo). The verb 'List' combined with the resource and examples leaves no ambiguity. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like census_get_destination which retrieves a single destination.

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 states when to use it (to list destination connections) but does not explicitly contrast with related tools like census_get_destination. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when to use it versus other tools. A small deduction for lacking explicit 'use this instead of X' guidance.

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