anythingmcp_list_connectors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so "Read-only, no side effects" largely repeats structured data. The description earns credit for the disclosure that does not exist elsewhere: the return is a plain-text catalog with a link to the full list, i.e. the shape and limits of the output.

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 sentences, front-loaded, with the catalog contents enumerated efficiently. The opening clause is somewhat wasted since it duplicates the readOnlyHint annotation, but the rest of the text is dense and non-repetitive.

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 no output schema and no annotations describing the return, the description carries the burden and does so: it states the format (plain text), the grouping (by category), the volume (267 + 5 types) and points to the full list. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no syntax the description could add. The description correctly implies no input is required to obtain the catalog.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (list connectors) and enumerates exactly what the payload contains: 267 pre-built connectors by category plus 5 no-code connector types. It also implicitly separates itself from anythingmcp_connect_client by framing itself as the discovery step.

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?

"Use this to discover available integrations before connecting a client" gives a clear trigger and positions the tool in sequence relative to connect_client. It stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g. vs. anythingmcp_overview or get_started), so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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