timps_connect_tools

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

No annotations provided. The description implies side effects ('configure', 'preview what would change') but doesn't explicitly state that it modifies files, may require permissions, or could overwrite existing configs. It mentions --dry-run for preview, so it's clear it writes files by default. This is reasonable but not highly detailed.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence that states the action, scope, and a key usage tip (--dry-run). No redundancy, no filler. Front-loaded with the verb and target.

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?

Simple tool with 2 optional params and clear purpose. The description covers it adequately but doesn't detail side effects, idempotency, or what happens if tool_id is omitted. Given the configuration-writing nature, more context would be helpful but is not critical for basic use.

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). The description adds value by explaining the purpose of dry_run (preview changes) and implies tool_id scoping ('every AI coding tool', 'all detected' default in schema). No additional syntax or nuance beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the action ('auto-configure'), the resource ('TIMPS Swarm as an MCP server'), and the scope ('every AI coding tool installed'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like timps_list_agents or timps_run_task which are about listing/running agents, not installation/config. Minor deduction for not explicitly contrasting with other timps_* tools, but it's specific enough.

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 mentions the --dry-run flag to preview changes, which is a usage hint. It doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, but the purpose is fairly unique (configuring MCP in other tools). However, it lacks guidance on when NOT to use it (e.g., when a specific tool is unsupported).

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