apex_connect

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It does add the 'Must be called first' sequencing behavior, which is useful. It doesn't provide details on connection lifecycle or failure modes, but given the simple nature of a connect call and existing annotations, this is adequate.

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 concise sentences, the first clearly states the action and target, the second a critical sequencing note. No fluff, no repetition of schema information. Perfectly front-loaded and structured.

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?

The tool has an output schema (not shown but indicated), so return values are presumably documented there. The description provides the crucial 'must be called first' context, which is essential for the agent's workflow. It doesn't mention prerequisites like environment variables, but those are already described in the schema defaults. For a connection tool, this is nearly complete.

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 input schema fully documents all 5 parameters with descriptions and defaults (100% coverage). The description itself adds no new parameter semantics; it just repeats the connect purpose. Therefore, baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 the tool's purpose: connecting to Oracle ADB via mTLS wallet. It includes a specific verb ('Connect'), a resource ('Oracle ADB'), and a key method ('mTLS wallet'). It also distinguishes itself by adding the sequencing instruction 'Must be called first', which sets it apart from all sibling tools.

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 instruction 'Must be called first' provides an explicit usage context, telling the agent to invoke this tool before other APEX operations. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but for a connection prerequisite this is clear. A small deduction for not elaborating on whether this is required for every session or any error consequences.

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