Browse all data connections in your organization to see available sources at a glance.
List all connections in the organization.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('list all connections') without revealing any behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether results are returned in a single response. This is a significant gap for a list operation.
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 that is easy to parse. It is appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters, though it could arguably be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.
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?
Despite having an output schema and no parameters, the description lacks any guidance on behavior such as pagination, scoping, or when to use this tool over its siblings. For a list tool in a context with many related operations, this is incomplete.
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 schema already documents everything. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Baseline 4 applies because with no params, the description cannot add meaning beyond the schema.
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 clearly states a specific verb ('list') and resource ('connections'), and the word 'all' distinguishes it from get_connection, which retrieves a single connection. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other list tools like list_uploads or list_pipelines, though those target different resources. Overall the purpose is clear.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_connection or preview_connection. The description only says what it does, not when to choose it over siblings. There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.