connect_shader_graph_nodes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action but does not reveal side effects, error conditions, whether the connection is directional, or what happens if nodes/ports are invalid. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, focused sentence that earns its place. It is concise and front-loaded with the essential action, with no unnecessary words or 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?

For a tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the semantics of connecting ports (e.g., compatibility between port types), nor does it describe any validation or return behavior. The sparse description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's effect and constraints.

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?

All 5 parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb ('Connect') and clearly identifies the resource ('two node ports in a VisualShader graph'). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like disconnect_shader_graph_nodes or set_shader_node_param, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions, prerequisites, or relationships with sibling tools such as disconnect_shader_graph_nodes or add_shader_graph_node. The agent must infer usage solely from the name and schema.

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