connection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral differences between modes (e.g., rich mode scans project datasets for inferred details) but omits return format, permissions, or any side effects. It is minimally transparent but lacks depth.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then efficiently explains the modes. Every part contributes useful information with no redundancy.

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 and no annotations, the description should explain what the agent will receive or how to interpret results. It only mentions what is scanned but not the return value structure, error cases, or further context needed for effective use.

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 has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by defining two modes ('mode=fast', 'mode=rich') and their behaviors, going beyond the empty schema. However, it does not clarify how 'mode' is passed given the schema has no properties.

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 identifies the tool as 'Connection discovery' with the action 'infer', and further distinguishes two modes (fast and rich). It clearly separates from sibling tools that deal with other DSS entities (project, dataset, etc.), though the exact meaning of 'connection' could be clearer.

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 through mode selection ('default mode=fast', 'mode=rich') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools are provided.

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