Test a destination's saved config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses the tool's behavior for webhooks (GETs URL) and Resend (lists domains), and explicitly states it does not send a real payload. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only or has side effects.

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 three sentences: first sentence states the main action, second and third provide specific details for different adapter types and an explicit exclusion. No wasted words.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains the tool's purpose, behavior for specific cases, and what it does not do. It does not mention return values or error conditions, but these are not required when no output schema exists.

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 one required parameter 'id' (uuid format) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain what 'id' refers to (presumably destination ID), so it adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline for low coverage is low.

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 it runs a connection check against the saved config, specifies behavior for different adapter types (webhooks, Resend), and explicitly distinguishes from other tools by stating it does not send a real campaign payload.

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 clear context on when to use this tool (to test a destination's config) and what it does for specific adapters. It includes an explicit exclusion (not sending real payload), but does not mention alternatives or prerequisites.

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