vcc_connect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses idempotency and error behavior (returns error with instructions if Visualizer not running). This is sufficient behavioral context for a connection tool.

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?

Two concise sentences, zero wasted words. The critical information (purpose, idempotency, error behavior) is front-loaded. Excellent structure.

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 no parameters and the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, side effects (idempotent), and error handling. Complete for a simple connection tool.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. It simply states the tool takes no arguments, which aligns with the 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 the tool's purpose: ensuring Visualizer is running and the VCC socket is open. It uses a specific verb ('Ensure') and resource ('Visualizer' and 'VCC socket'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like vcc_eval or vcc_run, which are likely dependent on prior connection.

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 implies usage context: before other VCC operations, and returns an error with instructions if Visualizer is not running. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use (e.g., if already connected) or alternatives.

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