remote_connect

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds context that notebooks remain local and existing remote kernels are killed, which is valuable behavioral insight beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is succinct with three sentences and two parameter lines, front-loading the purpose and avoiding unnecessary words.

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 description covers the tool's effect, parameter formats, and a caution about shutting down existing kernels, making it complete for a connection tool without an output schema.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining 'server_url' with an example and 'token' with its origin, adding essential meaning beyond the schema's title and type.

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 verb 'Connect' and the resource 'remote Jupyter Server', and specifies that only kernel operations are routed remotely while notebooks stay local, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'remote_disconnect' and 'kernel_start'.

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 explicitly states the use case 'accessing remote compute, GPUs, or data', and mentions that existing remote kernels are shut down, but does not compare to alternatives like 'kernel_start' for local kernels.

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