Show current i3X connection

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

No annotations present, so description must fully disclose behavior. It describes the output (active, baseUrl, auth scheme, catalog snapshot) but does not explicitly note it's a read-only operation. However, for a status query, this is largely transparent and expects no side effects.

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?

One sentence that directly states what the tool returns. No filler, front-loaded with key information. Perfectly concise for a status-check tool.

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 no output schema, the description provides a reasonable summary of return fields (active, baseUrl, auth scheme, catalog snapshot). It does not detail data types or pagination, but for a simple status tool it is sufficiently complete. Sibling tools like 'server_info' suggest additional nuance, but this description stands alone well.

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 tool has no parameters (0 params, schema coverage 100%). With no parameters, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info, and it doesn't, making it adequate.

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 returns connection status including active flag, baseUrl, auth scheme, and catalog snapshot. It uses a specific verb 'returns' and uniquely identifies the resource (i3X connection), distinguishing it from siblings like 'connect' which establishes a connection.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or when to avoid it. While it's implied as a status check, there is no mention of alternatives or context like 'use before other operations'. Given the simplicity, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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