connect

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool 'Returns connection status and instance URLs,' implying it is a read-only test. However, it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, permissions required, or error behavior (e.g., what happens on failed connection). This leaves some ambiguity for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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 four concise sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose, and subsequent sentences add critical usage guidance and return information. Every sentence earns its place, making it easy for an AI to parse quickly.

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 low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers purpose, when to use, parameter context, and return value. It is missing details on error handling or side effects, but for a simple test tool this is sufficient. A score of 4 reflects minor gaps in a complete picture.

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% coverage with a single parameter (platform) including an enum description. The description adds context by saying 'Test live connections to one or all platforms,' which reinforces the parameter's purpose but does not provide additional semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline is 3, and the description is adequate but not exceptional.

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 tool's purpose: 'Test live connections to one or all platforms using credentials already stored in .env.' The verb 'test' and the resource 'live connections' are precise, and the scope is explicitly defined as 'one or all platforms.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like connect_jira and connect_salesforce, which likely establish specific connections rather than test existing ones.

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 provides strong usage guidance: 'Call this after get_config to verify connections are working' and 'Do NOT ask the user for any credentials before calling this.' This tells the AI when to invoke the tool and what not to do. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool in favor of sibling connect_* tools or other alternatives, so it loses one point.

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