Connect BYO machine

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive write, but the description adds no behavioral context whatsoever: no mention of what a 'BYO machine' connection entails, what credentials or secrets are consumed, whether it is reversible, or how it relates to the org/project scope. The description carries none of the burden the sparse annotations leave open.

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?

It is short, but brevity here comes from under-specification rather than efficient information density. The single phrase adds nothing that the tool name and title do not already convey.

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 creation tool with 9 parameters, nested objects, low schema coverage, no output schema, and only sparse annotations, the description is wholly inadequate. An agent has no basis for choosing correct values for secret_env, project_ids, or metadata, nor for knowing what the call returns.

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 description coverage is only 33% across 9 parameters, including nested objects (env, secret_env, metadata) and a reserved-key rule in metadata. The description mentions no parameters at all, so it does nothing to compensate for the undocumented fields.

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 is a verbatim restatement of the tool title, 'Connect a BYO machine'. While 'connect' is a verb and 'machine' is a resource, 'BYO' is unexplained jargon and nothing distinguishes this from siblings like machines_update, machines_get, or pools_create.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pools_create or machines_update, nor any stated prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing secret or project). The agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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