PowerPlatform MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure burden. It fails to indicate whether this is a read-only operation, if there are rate limits, or how pagination behaves with maxRecords. The description only covers filtering capabilities without addressing safety or operational characteristics.

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, efficiently constructed sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word serves a purpose, and the optional filtering clause appropriately trails without cluttering the primary purpose statement.

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 presence of an output schema and complete parameter documentation, the description provides adequate context for invocation. However, given the lack of annotations and the specialized nature of PowerPlatform connection references, the description is minimal—it does not explain what connection references represent or their relationship to flows/solutions.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds conceptual grouping for three filter parameters (managedOnly, hasConnection, inactive) by mapping them to 'managed status,' 'connection presence,' and 'active state,' but completely omits mention of maxRecords and environment parameters, leaving the schema to handle those alone.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('connection references') within the PowerPlatform environment. It specifies the target domain effectively, though it could more explicitly distinguish from sibling 'get-' tools like get-flows or get-solutions by clarifying what connection references specifically are.

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 mentions available filters ('optional filtering by managed status, connection presence, and active state') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like query-records, or when filtering is necessary versus retrieving all records.

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