ftp_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Connect' without explaining that this creates a named session, that subsequent FTP operations depend on this connection, that the connection should later be closed with ftp_disconnect, or what the return value looks like. For a stateful operation, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a connection tool, stating the action and the two input modes without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It fails to explain the session management model, the role of the 'name' parameter as a session identifier, or how this tool relates to the rest of the FTP command set. A more complete description would mention that a successful connection establishes a named session for subsequent operations.

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 every parameter having a description. The tool description adds a high-level distinction between using credentials and using a saved site name, but it does not delve into parameter syntax or precedence beyond what the schema already provides. This aligns with the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 function: 'Connect to an FTP/FTPS/SFTP server using credentials or a saved site name.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools that perform file operations or site management. The two connection methods (credentials or saved site) add useful precision.

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 that this tool is the initial step for establishing a connection, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing a pre-existing saved site or checking existing connections via ftp_connection_info. The usage context is only implied by the tool's name and sibling set.

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