Yandex Metrika: connect

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent and non-destructive, and the description adds real behavior: the sign-in happens in the browser, the URL is one-time and local, and no token passes through chat. It does not warn that a second call without connection_id may create a duplicate connection, which is the natural risk given idempotentHint=false.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the return value, then the renewal and next-step instructions. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need little explanation, yet the description still names login_url and its one-time nature, plus the follow-up tool. The remaining gap is the optional alias parameter's effect and the consequence of repeated invocation on a very small two-parameter tool.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, and the description's phrasing about connection_id closely mirrors the schema's own wording. The 'alias' parameter is not explained at all in the description, so it adds little meaning beyond structured data.

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 ('Signs in to Yandex Metrika in the browser') with the granted scope ('read-only access') and the return artifact ('one-time local login_url'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like metrika_status or metrika_disconnect, which are named as adjacent steps in the flow.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context plus a renewal path ('Pass connection_id to renew an expired connection') and an explicit follow-up ('Afterwards call metrika_status'). It does not state a precondition such as checking metrika_status first, or what happens if a connection already exists, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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