list_connectors

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral aspects of filtering and pagination, but does not explicitly state that listing is read-only or describe default behavior (e.g., returns all connectors if no filter). The word 'List' implies non-mutating, but the description leaves some behavioral context unstated.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose ('List Arc connectors') and efficiently adds the key optional capabilities. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple list tool with 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage (filtering and pagination). It could be more complete by noting that omitting filters returns all connectors, but overall it provides sufficient context for a straightforward list operation.

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 100%, with each parameter (top, skip, filter, select, orderby) having a detailed description. The tool description adds only a general mention of 'filtering and pagination', which does not exceed what the schema already conveys. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'List Arc connectors with optional filtering and pagination' uses a specific verb (List) and resource (Arc connectors), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_connector (single item) and create/update/delete_connector (mutations). The scope of listing with optional filters and pagination is clearly stated.

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 clearly implies this tool is for listing multiple connectors, as opposed to get_connector for a single connector. However, it does not explicitly exclude any alternatives or state when not to use this tool. It provides clear context but lacks explicit exclusions.

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