List provider connections

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that secrets are never returned (only env var names), which is a critical behavioral trait. However, it does not mention other aspects like ordering, empty results, or potential performance impacts.

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?

Two sentences, 14 words, front-loaded with purpose. Every word adds value; no extraneous information.

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 (one optional enum parameter, no output schema), the description covers the main action and a key behavioral detail. However, it omits return structure and parameter guidance, which would be helpful for an agent.

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 coverage is 0% (no descriptions on parameters), and the tool description does not explain the 'provider' parameter. The agent gets no help on how to use the filter, such as default behavior or the effect of omitting it.

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 tool lists provider connections, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_connection or list_projects, and adds a safety note about secrets.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_provider_mappings or create_connection. The description implies usage for retrieving connections but lacks comparisons or exclusions.

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