sb_connect

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

The annotation already marks the call read-only, so no safety contradiction exists. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it authenticates through environment variables unless credentials are passed explicitly, and it is intended as the initial bootstrap call.

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 short sentences with no filler; the main purpose, ordering requirement, and credential fallback are each stated once and front-loaded.

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 simple two-parameter bootstrap tool, the description covers purpose, output ('list the sites'), ordering, and credential handling. It remains slightly incomplete because it does not clarify whether login is a persistent session or how it relates to sb_site_list, but no output schema exists so the stated output is still sufficient.

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% and the schema gives only type names, but the description clarifies that email and password override environment-provided SB_EMAIL and SB_PASSWORD. This is useful semantic info for deciding whether to pass the parameters at all.

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 states a specific action ('Log in and list the sites this account can operate') with a clear resource. It is not a tautology and is easy to understand, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby sb_site_list tool, which likely also relates to listing sites.

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 instruction 'Call this first' gives explicit ordering guidance, and the note about reading SB_EMAIL and SB_PASSWORD tells the agent when parameters can be omitted. It does not state when not to use it or name alternatives such as sb_site_list, so it falls short of full alternative routing.

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