connect_provider

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it states the credential is stored, is never returned by any tool, and that only the connected provider is returned. It also explains the REST-vs-browser-session distinction, making the side effects and security posture clear.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core action appears first, followed by return behavior, then usage conditions. Every sentence contributes either selection guidance, safety information, or behavioral context, with no filler.

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 there is no output schema, the description usefully states what the tool returns and what it never returns. It also covers when to use it and how it relates to browser login and mail tools. Minor gaps like overwrite behavior or failure modes are not critical for an agent deciding whether to invoke this tool.

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 reinforces the parameters by calling the credential a 'pasted API key' and emphasizing 'one client and one provider,' but it does not add substantial semantic detail beyond the schema's already thorough parameter descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Store a pasted API key for one client and one provider.' It clearly distinguishes the tool's purpose from the sibling tools, which are about calling provider APIs, planning setups, or auditing clients, by framing this as a credential-storage operation.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this only for providers with no browser login, or when a REST API key is needed alongside a session.' It also names the alternative path, `munim connect` at the terminal, for browser login, which helps an agent choose correctly.

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