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

Annotations already mark this as a non-destructive mutation, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the return is a one-time link, approval happens out-of-band on the provider's own page, and the home list afterwards spans all attached storages. It does not say what happens if the storage is already attached or whether the connection can be undone.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and effect; the product prefix and the path-disambiguation sentence are mildly extra but both earn their place by clarifying behavior after the call.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what happens (link returned, approval flow, resulting state) well enough to call it correctly. Missing only edge-case behavior and the exact argument format.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It names the accepted providers and the 'dropbox:/condo' path example hints at a lowercase provider identifier, but it never states the exact value format expected for the `storage` argument, leaving room for a wrong value.

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 — attach another storage (Dropbox, Google Drive, OneDrive) to this connection — and explains the mechanism (a one-time approval link). It is functionally distinguishable from read-oriented siblings like list_homes/read_home, but no sibling is named explicitly to route the agent.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you want an additional storage attached. The description explains post-conditions and even how to disambiguate same-named homes in paths, but gives no explicit when-not conditions, prerequisites, or named alternatives (e.g., setup_home).

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