list_tunnel_connections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal the scope ('active connections'), but it says nothing about pagination, response shape, whether results are limited, or whether the operation is read-only. For a network inspection tool this leaves important behavior unstated.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. While terse, every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with only two required parameters and no output schema, so full return-value documentation is less critical. However, the description does not explain what an active connection entry contains, whether results are paginated, or how this relates to tunnel configuration and connectivity state. It is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already documents account_id and tunnel_id adequately. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but it does not need to because the schema carries the meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('active connections for a Cloudflare Tunnel'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_tunnels or get_tunnel by targeting connections rather than tunnel objects or configuration.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_tunnels, get_tunnel, or get_tunnel_configuration. It does not mention prerequisites like needing a tunnel_id first, nor does it describe scenarios where this endpoint is or is not appropriate.

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