List Tealfabric connectors, retrieve a specific connector by ID, or fetch connector parameters to inspect integration details before configuring workflows.
List Tealfabric connectors, get a specific connector, or fetch connector parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | No | Optional action; omit to list all | |
| connector_id | No | Connector ID (for action=get when supported) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falsev0.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it does not state that this is read-only, whether connector parameters may expose sensitive values, or what permission/error behavior applies. The safe-read nature is only inferred from the listed operations.
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 front-loaded sentence lists the three supported modes with no filler. Each clause maps directly to an available operation.
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 low-complexity, two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the available operations adequately. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could have confirmed read-only behavior and hinted at what connector parameters return.
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 action enum and connector_id already document parameter usage. The description only adds a high-level mapping of list/get/parameters modes and no extra syntax, defaults, or constraints.
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 names the resource (Tealfabric connectors) and three specific operations: list, get, and fetch parameters. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from connector siblings such as tealfabric_get_connector_oauth2_required or tealfabric_test_connector.
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?
It enumerates the three supported modes, but the actual selection logic is left to the schema's action enum and connector_id description. No when-not guidance or sibling alternatives are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.