configure_server

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

In the absence of annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: no parameters = show, any parameters = update and reconnect, and only provided parameters are changed. It does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects of reconnection, but it covers the primary behavioral traits.

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 well-structured with a numbered list and bullet points. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the purpose. No redundant or missing content.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, modes, partial update behavior, and parameter examples. Missing details on return value and potential reconnection impacts, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds detailed semantics for all 5 parameters, including example values (e.g., 'macmini', 'localhost', 8000). This compensates fully for the schema gap.

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 purpose: 'Configure the active Hummingbot API server connection.' It distinguishes two modes: no parameters shows current config, any parameters updates and reconnects. This verb+resource combo is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools.

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 outlines when to use the tool (for configuration) and explains the two usage modes explicitly. It does not list alternatives or explicitly state when not to use, but within the sibling context, no alternative exists.

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