tg_list_connections

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, error handling, rate limits, or authorization requirements. The description adds no value beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise at 6 words. However, it lacks structure and completeness, which is not a virtue when critical information is missing. It earns a middle score for being short but insufficiently informative.

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 the low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description should at least hint at what 'connections' means or what the tool returns. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to confidently use the tool.

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 schema has a required parameter 'gateway_id' with no description, and the tool description provides no explanation of this parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate by clarifying the parameter's meaning or source.

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 'List connections on a transit gateway' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (connections on a transit gateway). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like tg_list_gateways and db_list_connections.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned. The description lacks any directives for the agent on selecting this tool over siblings.

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