probe_connect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavioral side effects. It reveals that connection can be auto-detected or selected by ID, but it does not disclose whether an existing connection is replaced, whether a debug session is established, how failures are handled, or what state changes persist after the call.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and easy to parse, though the brevity contributes to missing parameter and lifecycle details.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation. The description is enough to understand the basic action, but it does not explain the role of chip, the expected probe connection lifecycle, or what happens after a successful connect, leaving too much for the agent to infer.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies probe_id in spirit ('auto-detect or by unique id'), but it gives no meaning for the 'chip' parameter, which is undocumented and has a confusing default of an empty string.

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 names a specific action ('Connect to a debug probe') and method ('via pyOCD'), and it adds selection modes ('auto-detect or by unique id'). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like probe_disconnect, though it does not explicitly state its relationship to the chip parameter or describe what 'connected' means for downstream probe operations.

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 implies that this tool should be used before other probe operations, but it does not explicitly say when to use it, when not to use it, or how it relates to alternatives like probe_disconnect or flash_firmware. An agent must infer the usage order from the tool name and sibling context.

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