List connectors

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a meaningful behavioral trait: connectors outside the allowlist are filtered out. However, it doesn't mention output format, pagination, ordering, or any other side effects, though 'list' implies a read-only 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?

Two short sentences with no unnecessary words. The essential action 'List connector names' comes first, and the allowlist filter follows immediately as important behavioral context. Every sentence 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?

With zero parameters, no output schema, and a straightforward list-only operation, the description is fully adequate. It tells the agent exactly what will be listed and notes the relevant filtering rule, which is the only behavioral nuance an agent needs to call it 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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing incomplete about parametric documentation. The description appropriately says only what is needed; no parameter description is required or expected.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('connector names'), making the tool's scope clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling get_* tools by focusing on names, and from list_connector_plugins by specifying connectors rather than plugins. No ambiguity remains about what the tool does.

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 gives clear context by indicating the output is limited to connector names and that an allowlist filter applies. It doesn't explicitly state when to avoid this tool and use a sibling, such as get_connector_config or list_connector_plugins, but for a simple list operation the intended use is evident.

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