connect_ecommerce

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a mutation requiring confirmation, but fails to describe other critical behaviors like overwriting existing connections, authentication requirements, rate limits, or post-connection effects (e.g., syncing data). This is insufficient for a mutation with sensitive credentials.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loading the purpose and adding a key usage note. It avoids redundancy but could be more structured (e.g., separate sections for purpose, usage, and confirmation). Efficient overall.

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?

The description adequately covers the core purpose and confirmation requirement for a complex tool with 19 well-documented parameters. However, it lacks details on what happens after a successful connection, how to handle errors, or the disconnection process (covered by a sibling). More context would improve completeness.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it merely summarizes the action. It provides no extra constraints or formatting guidance beyond what the schema already includes.

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 connects e-commerce platforms (Shopify, WooCommerce, PrestaShop, VTEX) to search products, orders, and customers. It specifies the core function and supported platforms. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'test_ecommerce_connection', though the purpose is distinct enough.

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 description advises asking the user which platform to use and notes that a mutation requires confirmation (confirm=true). This provides basic usage context but lacks guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives, such as testing a connection first.

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