keychain_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses encryption, API validation, and scoping, but omits potential side effects like overwriting existing credentials or behavior on failed validation.

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 sentences, no redundant information, and front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes value.

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 simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior and scope. It could mention response format or error handling, but overall it is adequate.

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% (all three parameters have descriptions in the schema). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter definitions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'store' and the resource 'encrypted platform credential', and includes a unique behavioral detail (testing before saving) that distinguishes it from sibling tools like keychain_list_platforms or keychain_disconnect.

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?

It mentions that the credential is tested before saving and scoped to the caller's API key, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like keychain_secure_connect or other keychain operations.

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