list_connections

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, and the description aligns with that by using the word 'List'. The description adds some behavioral detail about grouping, but it does not disclose whether connections are live-tested, cached, or what the exact output shape looks like. Given the annotation covers the main safety concern, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, the resource, and the grouping behavior efficiently, giving the agent exactly what it needs to understand the 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?

For a simple zero-parameter listing tool with a readOnly annotation, the description is largely complete. It does not explain the exact return fields or format, but 'List all available SQL Server connections grouped by connectionGroup' gives sufficient functional context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to document parameter meanings. The input schema is empty and the description adds no unnecessary parameter details, keeping this dimension at the baseline for no-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource ('all available SQL Server connections') and result structure ('grouped by connectionGroup'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from the query-focused sibling tools like query and get_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 description makes its purpose obvious: it is the discovery/listing tool for connections rather than a tool that executes queries or inspects schemas. It does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but for a zero-parameter list operation, the intended context is clear enough.

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