refresh_connectors

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by explicitly stating that external MCP processes are restarted and their tools rediscovered. It also discloses the permission requirement ('Requires allow_connectors'). This adds meaningful behavioral context, though it does not detail potential side effects like temporary downtime or failure modes.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and then the consequence. Every phrase adds value—'Restart external MCP connector processes' and 'rediscover their namespaced tools'—with no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose, the effect (restart and rediscovery), and a key prerequisite (allow_connectors). It does not explain when to use this tool or possible error conditions, but these are not critical for such a simple operation.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the schema trivially covers 100% of parameters. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics; the baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the tool's action and requirement.

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 uses a clear verb 'Restart' and specifies the resource 'external MCP connector processes' and the additional action 'rediscover their namespaced tools.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_connectors, add_connector, and remove_connector, which perform different operations.

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 for refreshing connectors after external MCP processes change, and it mentions the 'allow_connectors' requirement. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_connector or remove_connector, nor does it provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

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