create_nlu_connector

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

The description explicitly calls out that the operation is mutating and explains the dryRun parameter's effect. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the mutating nature is known, but the dryRun nuance adds value beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 purpose and followed by a key usage note. No extraneous information, all sentences earn their place.

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 a moderate complexity (5 params, nested settings), the description covers the main creation purpose and dryRun behavior but does not specify the return value (e.g., the created connector object) or behavior on duplicate names. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Mentioning the dryRun parameter in the description is helpful but not additional semantics.

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 action ('creates') and the resource ('NLU connector') and lists supported types. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_nlu_connectors, get_nlu_connector, etc., which are for listing, getting, updating, or deleting.

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 includes a clear usage hint: 'MUTATING: Set dryRun=false to create.' This guides the agent on how to invoke the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., update_nlu_connector for modifications), but the creation context is implied by the purpose.

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