Update KB Sync Connector

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

The annotations already indicate this is a write operation with idempotency and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no further context about side effects, partial updates, or return values, providing minimal value beyond what the annotations already convey.

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 concise sentence of nine words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and contains no unnecessary information.

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 simple CRUD operation, full schema coverage, and comprehensive annotations, the description is adequate. It lacks information about return values or effects on existing connectors, but the overall context is sufficient for an agent to select and use the tool correctly.

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 schema provides full descriptions for all four parameters (connector_id, name, disabled, connector_specific_config). The description's mention of 'name, config, or disabled state' merely summarizes the schema without adding additional semantics or examples, so it meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 (update), the resource (KB Sync connector), and the specific attributes that can be changed (name, config, disabled state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, get, list, and delete.

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 does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using create for new connectors or get to read current state. It relies on the tool name and context to imply its usage, which is clear but not explicitly stated.

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