jms_create_connection_token

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only states the action and account resolution input. It does not mention token lifetime, reusability effects, permission requirements, or side effects of creation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is somewhat under-sized for a tool with five parameters and no schema descriptions, so it is concise but not as well-structured for agent comprehension as it could be.

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 creation tool with five parameters, no annotations, and no schema descriptions, this description is insufficient. It does not explain how this token will be used, how reusable or connect_method affect behavior, or what the output schema contains, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all parameter meaning. It clarifies 'account' accepts either a concrete ID or user-facing reference, but leaves asset_id, protocol, reusable, and connect_method completely unexplained.

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 uses a clear action verb ('Create') and identifies the resource ('connection token'). It also specifies the key input choices ('concrete account ID or user-facing account reference'), which helps distinguish this from sibling list/expire token tools, though it does not explain what a connection token is for.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to create a connection token versus using alternatives like list_connection_tokens or expire_connection_token. There are no prerequisites, context hints, or exclusions to help the agent choose this tool correctly.

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