list_active_live_connections

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses a key behavioral trait: returned connection names are deduplicated. It also clarifies the tool excludes tools, going beyond the basic annotation-less requirement. However, it doesn't mention if it's read-only or any other potential side effects, but that's less critical for a list operation.

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 short but contains redundancy: the second sentence essentially repeats the first ('active and live connections' and 'not the tools'). A more concise version would merge these into a single sentence, making it tighter without losing meaning.

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 simple, zero-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, scope, and a behavioral trait (deduplication). It doesn't explain return format details, but since it returns names, that's sufficient. It feels complete for its complexity.

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 has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% with no properties. Per the guidelines, a 0-parameter baseline is 4, and the description doesn't need to explain parameters. It adds no parameter-specific info, which 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 it lists only active and live connections (not tools), uses a specific verb 'List' with a specific resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_connections and list_tools_with_connections by explicitly excluding tools.

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 provides an explicit usage example in quotes, indicating when to use it ('list all connections which are active and live'). It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the distinction from tools and the qualifier 'only' imply clear context.

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