firestarter_connect_store

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutating nature is already known. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the two-step process (check first, then connect), the ability to retrieve platform-specific credential instructions, and that calling with platform only does not connect. No contradictions. Slight gap: no mention of what happens to existing connections or error behaviors, but not required.

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 core purpose, followed by sibling alternatives and usage flow. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff. Excellent structure for an AI agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key context: what it does, which platforms it supports, which alternatives exist, and the recommended call pattern. It doesn't explain return values or edge cases, but for a connection tool this is reasonably complete. The sibling differentiation is especially strong.

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 80% with detailed parameter descriptions for shop_domain, access_token, consumer_key, and consumer_secret. The description adds minimal parameter-level info beyond what the schema already provides, but it does reinforce the two-step pattern and platform-specific credential instructions. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries most of the weight.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Connect' with specific resource ('seller's BigCommerce, Shopee, Lazada, Wix, or WooCommerce store to Firestarter') and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools for Shopify and TikTok Shop. This goes beyond mere clarity to active sibling distinction.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives: 'For Shopify use firestarter_connect_shopify instead; for TikTok Shop use firestarter_connect_tiktok.' Also gives clear step-by-step usage: first call with only platform to check/existing connection/get instructions, then call again with credentials. This is model-level guidance.

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