tealfabric_list_connectors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. The verbs 'list', 'get', and 'fetch' communicate read-only intent, but the description does not explicitly state that nothing is mutated, describe return/output behavior, or address the 'when supported' caveat around connector_id.

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 no filler; the three operations are presented in a compact, parallel structure. It is appropriately sized relative to the tool's simple schema.

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 tool with zero required parameters and complete schema coverage, the description provides enough to attempt a basic call. However, it leaves gaps around return format, whether get and parameters both require connector_id, and how this tool relates to connector siblings.

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 baseline is 3. The description aligns with the action and connector_id parameters but adds little semantic detail beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Names Tealfabric connectors as the resource and uses distinct verbs for each mode: 'list', 'get', 'fetch'. However, the tool is named list_connectors yet the description covers three different actions and does not differentiate itself from sibling connector-related tools.

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 supported operations are implied by the description and the schema's 'omit to list all' note provides basic usage context. But there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as tealfabric_test_connector or tealfabric_get_connector_oauth2_required.

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