Datasets List Connection Grants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of pagination, result shape, permission requirements, or what 'grant on a connection' includes (path grants?) relative to the sibling delete_connection_path_grant.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is efficient, though so terse that the brevity shades into under-specification rather than crisp conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the read-only annotation covers the safety profile. Still, for a grants-listing tool sitting among several similar grant tools, the description omits the parameter's meaning and any scoping/pagination context, leaving it only minimally 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 lone parameter connection_id has no schema-level description. The description says 'on a connection' but never explains the expected identifier format (ID vs name, scoping) so an agent must guess how to populate it.

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?

Clear verb (List) and resource (permission grants on a connection), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not differentiate itself from sibling grant readers such as workspace_list_workspace_grants or workbooks_list_workbook_grants, so it falls short of a 5.

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 indication of when to call this versus datasets_add_connection_grant, datasets_delete_connection_path_grant, or the other *_list_*_grants siblings. The description states what it does but gives zero routing guidance or prerequisites.

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