TD Connect (live)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool wraps a documented API call and includes the exact syntax, which aids transparency. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., modifying the network graph), error handling, or permissions needed.

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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides technical detail. It is front-loaded and concise.

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 simplicity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains what it does, how it works via the API call, and gives an example. However, it lacks mention of common failure cases or prerequisites like both operators must exist.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds context by explaining the overall operation and giving an example of full paths, but it does not significantly deepen understanding beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 tool connects one operator's output to another's input in a live TouchDesigner instance, with a specific verb ('Connect') and resource ('operator's output to another operator's input'). It also references the underlying API call, distinguishing it from sibling tools like td_create_operator or td_delete.

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 usage for connecting operators but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context of sibling tools makes it somewhat clear, but explicit guidance is missing.

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