Update a service-principal Dataverse connection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the underlying command, that it mutates a live environment, and that the confirm flag gates the mutation into a dry run otherwise. It does not state reversibility of the rotated secret, permission requirements, or whether the old secret is revoked, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences with the destructive nature and the confirm gate front-loaded after the purpose statement. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the critical safety information (live mutation, confirm gate, dry-run fallback) and the execution mechanism. Missing details on permissions, secret revocation, and failure behavior are minor gaps but would round out the picture.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all ten parameters including confirm, clientSecret masking, and profile resolution. The description only reinforces the confirm parameter, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: rotating the app registration or secret behind a service-principal Dataverse connection. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like cs_create_connection, cs_delete_connection, and cs_list_connections, and even from cs_admin_register_application.

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?

Gives clear operating context: it runs 'pac connection update' under the active pac auth profile and requires confirm: true for a live change, otherwise it is a dry run. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g. use cs_create_connection for a new connection), so the when-not-to-use case is left implicit.

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