airbyte_list_destination_definitions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful details about the return value (name, definition ID, Docker image), which goes beyond the annotations.

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 well-organized with clear sections (purpose, when to use, returns, examples). Every sentence adds value and is free of redundancy.

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 simplicity, clear annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, usage context, return fields, and an example. No gaps.

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%, but the description implicitly covers workspace_id by showing it in the example. However, it omits the response_format parameter entirely, which is documented in the schema but not explained in the description. Thus, only partial compensation.

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 lists destination connector definitions, distinguishing it from airbyte_list_source_definitions and airbyte_get_destination_definition. It also explains the purpose of definition IDs for creating destinations.

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 'When to Use' section provides explicit scenarios: finding definition IDs before creating a destination and auditing custom connectors. It does not explicitly list when not to use, but the context is clear enough.

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