calmesh_start_credential_connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the transparency burden. It tells the user about the 'full' scope requirement and per-provider credential needs. However, it lacks details about side effects (e.g., creating a connection record), what the response contains (e.g., connection ID), or any error conditions. This is partially helpful but incomplete for a state-changing action.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second sentence compactly details the two modes and the scope requirement. Every clause 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 tool with two modes and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, prerequisites, and mode differences. However, it does not explain what happens after connecting (e.g., how to verify or use the connection) or what response to expect. Given the complexity and lack of output schema, this is a moderate gap in completeness.

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 already covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, including 'Required for caldav provider' for username and password. The description essentially restates this information in prose ('For CalDAV: server URL, username, and password required') without adding significant new meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description does not elevate beyond that.

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 the tool's function: 'Connect a CalDAV server or iCal URL using credentials.' It identifies the specific verb ('Connect'), the resource (CalDAV server or iCal URL), and distinguishes it from the sibling 'calmesh_start_oauth_connection' by emphasizing 'using credentials' and the 'full' scope requirement. The two modes (CalDAV and iCal URL) are explicitly separated.

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 provides clear context for when to use each mode: CalDAV requires server URL, username, and password, while iCal URL only needs the public URL. It also notes the 'full' scope prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly mention avoiding this tool when OAuth is available or name the alternative, though the sibling name implies the distinction.

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