connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses important side effects: previous connection is auto-closed, successful connection returns table info and permission mode, and permission mode cannot be modified. It omits error handling and timeout behavior, but covers key operational traits well.

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 paragraph is front-loaded with the core action and supported databases, then details special cases efficiently using semicolons. It is information-dense but not repetitive, though a few clauses are redundant with the schema.

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 10 parameters, 6 database types, and no output schema, the description covers connection behavior, return values (table list and permission mode), and database-specific quirks. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly without opening the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description reiterates some database-specific parameter usage (e.g., SQLite filepath, Oracle database as service name, MSSQL trustServerCertificate) but adds little beyond what the schema already states, 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?

States a specific verb (connect) and resource (database), lists all supported database types, and distinguishes from siblings by describing what happens on connection (previous connection closed, returns table info and permission mode).

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?

Provides clear context for when to use it (to establish a connection before other operations) and implicitly warns that a new connection replaces the old one. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings like disconnect or connection_status.

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