set_tableauserver_connection

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. It mentions configuration but does not specify whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, what permissions are required, or how it affects existing connections. This leaves critical behavioral traits unclear for a tool that likely modifies workbook settings.

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 a single, direct sentence with no unnecessary words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without redundancy or structural issues.

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 complexity (6 parameters, likely a mutation operation) and the absence of annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain parameter meanings, behavioral implications, or output details, even though an output schema exists. This leaves significant gaps for effective tool use.

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 0%, meaning parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description does not add any semantic details about the parameters (e.g., what 'server' or 'dbname' represent, format expectations, or default behaviors), failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 action ('Configure') and the target ('workbook datasource to use a Tableau Server connection'), making the purpose evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like set_hyper_connection or set_mssql_connection, which serve similar configuration purposes for different connection types.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_hyper_connection or set_mssql_connection. The description lacks context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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