연결 상태 확인

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful transparency about auto-finalizing the connection after browser close and making an actual LMS request when verify=true, without contradicting the annotations.

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 compact sentences cover what the tool shows, a specific edge-case behavior, and the optional verification mode. No redundant or vague wording.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description lists the displayed fields (login status, auth method, last sync, storage method), which is sufficient for a status check. Missing error conditions are not critical for this simple read-only tool.

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 only parameter verify is fully described in the schema with a clear meaning and default value. The description reinforces when verify=true changes behavior, providing complete parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states what the tool does: shows login status, authentication method, last sync time, and storage method, plus optional session verification. The verb 'shows' and 'checks' are specific, and the resource (auth status) is distinct from sibling connection management 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?

Provides one usage scenario (calling after closing the login browser) and explains the verify parameter, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like connect_lms or disconnect_lms. Guidance is useful but implicit rather than explicit.

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