build_connection_convention

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It indicates the output is 'suggested' (not created), but lacks details on side effects, required permissions, or whether it is read-only. Minimal behavioral transparency.

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?

Single sentence is concise but lacks structure. It front-loads the purpose but omits important details that could be added without significant verbosity.

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 the tool has 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (unavailable in description), the description is incomplete. It mentions output components (connection_id, tags, metadata) but does not explain their types or constraints, leaving the agent under-informed.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of the 6 parameters (e.g., environment, provider_config_key). The agent receives no guidance on parameter meaning or valid values, failing to compensate for schema gaps.

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 clearly states it builds a suggested connection_id, tags, and metadata object for a managed connection. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apply_connection_convention and describe_connection_convention, but could be more explicit about what 'suggested' implies.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apply_connection_convention or create_connect_session. No prerequisites or context provided.

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