execute_stored_connector

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

Despite no annotations, description discloses key behaviors: backend decrypts secret server-side, tool never receives credentials, cannot be used for arbitrary URLs/configs. Full disclosure of safety constraints and limitations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in first sentence. Second sentence is lengthy but contains essential warnings. Could be more concise, but every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, security model, constraints, and preconditions. Does not detail return values or error cases, but this is acceptable for a test-run tool without output schema.

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 100% (both parameters documented in schema). Description adds semantic value by emphasizing that toolId must reference a saved connector and that inputParams are the connector's parameters. Security context is provided beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Test-run an ALREADY-SAVED connector by its tool id', specifying the action, resource, and constraint. Differentiates from sibling tools like execute_tool and dry_run_tool by focusing on connectors with server-side credential handling.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (test-run saved connector), when not (no credentials pass through, cannot point to custom URL/auth config), and implies alternative admin-only tool for custom config. Provides clear guidance on inputs.

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