Rocky Connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers none of it: it does not say the tool may launch a fresh Rocky process versus attach to an existing one, whether the call blocks, what permissions or license it needs, or what happens on failure. The one thing disclosed — that it connects — is already in the name.

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 five-word sentence has zero waste and is front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concise — there is no second sentence to earn a place. Shortness here reflects missing content, not efficient editing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but for a session-establishing tool with process-launching side effects and zero annotations, the description should at minimum state that other rocky_* calls depend on it and that mode controls launch-vs-attach. It omits both.

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%, with exe, mode, port, and version each fully documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, but it does not need to given the schema quality.

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 verb and a resource ("Connect to Ansys Rocky"), so an agent knows it establishes a session with Rocky. But it adds nothing beyond the name/title pairing and does not distinguish it from siblings like rocky_disconnect or rocky_status, which bookend the same lifecycle. Purpose is recognizable but vague.

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 when-to-use guidance is given: nothing says this must be called before other rocky_* tools, nor how it relates to rocky_disconnect or to project tools. The launch/attach choice is documented only in the schema's mode parameter, not in the description. Usage is at best implied.

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