list_all_connections

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description merely reiterates 'Fetches data. Makes no changes,' adding no new behavioral context beyond what the annotations supply. It fails to mention pagination behavior or any other traits not covered by 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?

The description is short but contains redundancy: 'List all connections' and 'List all existing connection resources' say essentially the same thing. It could be more concise without losing clarity.

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 list tool, the description covers the basic purpose and safety (via annotations). However, it lacks details on pagination behavior (limit/offset) and response format (no output schema). Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for 6 parameters, each well-described in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific context, so it meets the baseline of 3 for schema-covered tools.

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 'List all connections' and 'List all existing connection resources,' with a READ-ONLY label and GET /connections endpoint. It unambiguously identifies the verb (list) and resource (connections), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_connection (single) and create_connection.

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 implies read-only usage with 'Fetches data. Makes no changes' but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_connection for a single connection or create_connection for writing. Usage is implied by the resource type, but no when-not or explicit context is provided.

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