kusto_connection_add

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states the tool adds or updates a configuration, implying mutation, but does not disclose behavior on conflict (e.g., whether updating a non-existent connection creates it or errors), persistence details, or side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key purpose. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 the tool has 6 parameters, 3 required, and siblings, the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose but does not explain update semantics (e.g., which fields are updatable), default behavior for optional fields like managedIdentityId, or output expectations. For a configuration tool, more context would be helpful.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not elaborate on parameter interactions or provide examples. The schema itself already explains each parameter concisely.

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 action ('Add or update') and the resource ('named connection configuration for Azure Data Explorer'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like kusto_connection_list and kusto_connection_remove, which handle listing and removal respectively.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to use kusto_connection_set_default or kusto_connection_test instead. The description lacks both positive usage context and exclusions.

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