CDP MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action ('Delete') without disclosing critical behavioral traits such as whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., data loss), or involves confirmation steps. This is inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 with a single sentence ('Delete a connector'), which is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, this brevity comes at the cost of completeness, but for conciseness alone, it scores perfectly.

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 tool's complexity (a destructive delete operation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and presence of an output schema (which might help but isn't described), the description is incomplete. It should cover behavioral risks, parameter meanings, and usage context to be adequate.

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%, and the description adds no parameter information beyond what's inferred from the tool name. It doesn't explain what 'connector_id' or 'tenant_id' represent, their formats, or usage context, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Delete a connector' clearly states the verb ('Delete') and resource ('connector'), but it's vague about what a 'connector' is in this context and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cdp_delete_connector_template' or 'cdp_delete_output_connector'. It's better than a tautology but lacks specificity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cdp_delete_connector_template' or 'cdp_delete_output_connector', nor does it mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for deletion. This leaves the agent with no usage direction.

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