gigwa_connect

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It details credential handling (environment variables, never passed through chat), anonymous access, and the connection verification with rollback on failure. This is excellent transparency.

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 clear sections and front-loaded purpose. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Minor improvements could trim redundancies, but overall efficient.

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 tool's complexity (credential security, environment variables, connection verification), the description covers all behavioral aspects. With no annotations and no output schema needing explanation, it is fully complete for an agent to use 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?

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description adds significant value: explains that bare host:port assumes https, elaborates on profile vs anonymous vs default credentials, and clarifies credential precedence. The schema alone would not convey these safety 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?

Clearly states it switches the active Gigwa server at runtime without restart. The verb 'switch' combined with 'active Gigwa server' precisely defines the action and resource. It differentiates itself from sibling tools which are about data import, query, or analysis.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use (to connect to a server) and how credentials are resolved. It implies not to use when you want to remain on the current server, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' statements. Still highly informative.

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