zpa_list_app_connectors

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

The description discloses that the tool returns health/status data, which is useful beyond the raw list semantics. The '(read-only)' label is already covered by readOnlyHint: true, so it adds little additional transparency, but there is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler or unnecessary repetition. Every word contributes to identifying the resource and purpose, making it easy for an agent to process quickly.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers broad intent but not enough operational detail for a 5-parameter invocation. The description does not clarify pagination behavior, response shape, or how search/page/microtenant parameters interact with the 'health/status' result set.

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 tool description itself adds no information about any of the five parameters; the only valuable parameter guidance exists in the query parameter's schema description. With schema description coverage at only 20%, the description should compensate by explaining page, page_size, search, and microtenant_id, but it does not.

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 action and resource: 'List ZPA app connectors', and adds an informative outcome component ('with health/status'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as zpa_get_app_connector and zpa_list_app_connector_groups, which deal with a single connector or connector groups rather than listing app connectors themselves.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool instead of the many sibling tools, such as zpa_get_app_connector, zpa_list_app_connector_groups, or other list/get tools. It does not state exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites. The intended usage can only be inferred from the word 'List'.

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