modify_connection

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It discloses the write/destructive nature, required persistent parameters, and special test-control parameters. Lacks details on rate limits or auth, but adequately covers main 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?

Well-structured with upfront warning, bullet points, and clear sentences. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Length is appropriate for the complexity.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage constraints, parameter details, and alternative endpoints. It is thorough and leaves no major gaps.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining the special role of schema_file (must read first) and clarifying that test parameters like trust_certificates do not persist. Provides context beyond schema.

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 it 'updates connection parameters for an existing connection within your Fivetran account.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and differs from sibling tools like modify_connection_column_config.

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?

Explicitly warns it is a WRITE OPERATION and to confirm with user. Provides when to use (updating persistent config) and when not (test parameters alone), including an alternative endpoint for running setup tests.

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