set_default_connector

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral transparency. It only states the action of setting a default connector, without disclosing side effects, whether the operation is reversible, what happens to the previous default, or any permission requirements. For a mutating operation, this is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It communicates the purpose and the key condition (copied connector) efficiently.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain what 'default connector' means, how the operation affects other connectors, or what the expected result is. A simple mutation tool still needs more context to be safely invoked by an agent.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameter (connectorId) with a clear description. The tool description adds the crucial constraint that the node must be a 'copied' connector node, enriching the schema's meaning. However, the schema lists required parameters as 0, and the description does not clarify that connectorId is likely mandatory, so the added value is moderate.

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 'Set' and identifies the resource as 'a copied connector node' and the outcome 'as the default connector'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools, which mostly target styling, layout, or node operations.

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 phrase 'Set a copied connector node as the default connector' implies usage when a copied connector exists and you need it to become the default. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Since no sibling tool handles connector defaults, the implied context is sufficient but not explicit.

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