Manage an external data-source connection (SFTP, AWS S3)

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

The description adds concrete behavioral details beyond annotations: for sftp create generates a keypair and returns the public key; for aws_s3 create generates an ExternalId and trust policy. It also states the testing requirement. Annotations already signal mutating/destructive behavior, so this is consistent.

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 concise, two sentences plus a requirement clause, yet covers the main actions and per-type details without redundancy. It is well-structured for quick parsing.

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?

The description provides essential context: it lists actions, per-type specifics, and a prerequisite (must pass test before use in trigger). However, it doesn't mention potential side effects like cost or irreversibility of delete, but given the annotations already indicate destructive action, this is acceptable.

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?

All 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema, and the description clarifies type-specific requirements (e.g., roleArn for aws_s3, hostname/username for sftp). Defaults for type and workspaceId are specified. This fully covers parameter semantics.

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 manages external data-source connections via create, list, test, or delete actions. It explicitly covers both supported types (sftp and aws_s3) with distinct behaviors, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like onboard_data_source or manage triggers.

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 explains when each action is appropriate (e.g., create for new connections, test before use) and mentions a prerequisite: connection must pass test before it can be used in a trigger. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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