list_warp_connectors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation and 'for an account' conveys scope, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or account-level authorization requirements. This is minimal disclosure for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single sentence with zero waste; the verb, resource, and scope are all front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and nothing is redundant or missing for a tool of this simplicity.

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 low-complexity — one fully documented parameter, no enums, no nested objects, no output schema — so the minimal descrption is nearly adequate. However, with no annotations, an agent is left inferring pagination behavior and the shape of the returned connector list, which a short additional sentence could have clarified.

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%, with account_id already documented as 'The account ID', so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'for an account' mildly reinforces the parameter's role but adds no new syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb (List), resource (WARP connectors), and scope (for an account), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like get_warp_connector and list_magic_transit_connectors through the specific resource name and verb, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_warp_connector (single connector) or list_magic_transit_connectors (a different connector type). No prerequisites, exclusions, or routing conditions are mentioned, leaving an agent to guess from naming conventions.

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