ingest_knowledge_base_connector

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It fails to disclose whether the operation is synchronous, whether it appends or overwrites, authorization requirements, or any side effects. The single sentence provides no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 10-word sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the key action. However, it could include more context without becoming verbose. Still, it earns its place by stating the purpose clearly with no fluff.

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 tool has 7 parameters including nested objects, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too brief. It lacks context about the ingestion process, output expectations, and how it relates to other knowledge base tools. The description does not adequately compensate for the 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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema itself documents all parameters. The description adds no additional semantic meaning about how parameters like 'separator', 'chunk_size', or 'source_config' affect the ingestion process. Baseline score of 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 action ('Ingest content into a knowledge base') and the specific method ('from a configured connector source'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'ingest_knowledge_base' and 'list_knowledge_base_connectors' by specifying the source type.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'ingest_knowledge_base' or 'ingest_knowledge_base_folder'). No prerequisites or context for usage are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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