connect_to_dorico

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

Although annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, the description adds critical behavioral context: the first connection triggers an authorization prompt that requires human action, and the token persists in AppData for later connections. This goes well beyond what annotations provide and helps the agent anticipate a potentially blocking interaction.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and usage rule, then provides Returns and Note sections that each earn their place. The authorization caveat and get_status alternative are directly useful; there is no filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with annotations covering safety and idempotence, the description is complete. It explains the human-in-the-loop authorization behavior, token persistence, what the function returns, and when to use a sibling tool instead. The output schema already covers return values, so no additional detail is needed.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema has 100% coverage with no required fields, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics because there are none to explain.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Connect to Dorico Remote Control and return application status.' It clearly differentiates itself from get_status by explaining that get_status should be used afterwards to re-read the state without reconnecting.

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 explicitly says 'Call this before anything else here' and notes that every other Dorico tool needs the session this opens. It also provides an alternative: 'Use get_status afterwards to re-read the state without reconnecting,' and states that re-calling is safe on an open connection.

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