connection_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation without mentioning side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior (e.g., what happens for unsupported connector types). The description lacks transparency about potential failure or safety characteristics.

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 very concise, consisting of two clear sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds essential constraints and alternatives without redundancy. 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?

Given the low complexity, no output schema, and high schema coverage, the description is adequately complete. It conveys purpose, usage context, and relevant constraints. A slight gap is the lack of return value description, but it's acceptable for a simple read operation.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate for high coverage with no extra value.

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 'Returns the connection state.' It specifies the supported connector types (Function and Connection SDK), differentiating it from sibling 'modify_connection_state' which updates state. The verb 'returns' and resource 'connection state' are precise.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Returns the connection state') and that it is only supported for Function and Connection SDK connectors. It also provides an alternative for updating state via a link to 'Update Connection State'. This gives clear when-not/alternative guidance.

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