scratchjr_connect

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

Annotations provide only basic hints, so the description adds useful behavioral context: it does not force-close existing sessions and uses a localhost-only port. This is meaningful beyond the structured annotations and there is no contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundancy. The core connection/launch behavior is front-loaded and the important safety clarification follows immediately.

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 simple setup tool with no parameters or output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and key caveat. It could explicitly mention whether this must be called before other ScratchJr tools, but the sibling set and the non-closing statement make that reasonably inferable.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 clear action ('Connect to ScratchJr Desktop or launch it') with a specific resource and a scope qualifier ('localhost-only control port'). It also clarifies what it does not do, distinguishing it from other tools like scratchjr_status.

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 implies when the tool is useful (when a connection is needed, possibly launching Desktop) and includes a safety note about existing sessions, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over siblings or any prerequisites/ordering. Usage is implied rather than fully guided.

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