Datasets List Connection Paths

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

Goes well beyond readOnly/openWorld annotations by disclosing that the tool auto-paginates to the last page and explaining the aggregation semantics of the response keys: entries merged from every page, total only when Sigma sends it, nextPage null and hasMore false. That pagination-absorption behavior is exactly the kind of trait an agent cannot get from annotations or the output schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and wasting no words. The second sentence is dense and slightly convoluted with nested parentheticals, costing it a point against a perfect score.

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?

A zero-parameter list tool with annotations and an output schema needs to convey scope, pagination handling, and what the caller receives; the description covers all three, including the aggregation of entries across pages. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is absent.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the baseline for 0 params is 4. No parameter description is needed or missing.

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?

States a specific verb (list) plus the resource (connection paths) and immediately defines what a path is (databases, schemas and tables) and the scope ('across all connections'). That scope line separates it from datasets_lookup_connection_path and datasets_list_connections without needing the schema.

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 scope phrase 'across all connections' implies when this is the right tool, but it never states when to prefer datasets_lookup_connection_path or datasets_list_connections instead, and gives no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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