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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying Hiveage endpoint GET /network/{hash_key}, which is useful context, but it does not disclose return behavior, error conditions, or authorization requirements.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scoped to a single record. There is no filler and the endpoint reference is brief.

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 simple one-parameter read operation with readOnlyHint and a fully described schema, the description is nearly complete. It identifies the resource and endpoint, though it could say more about the returned connection object if an agent needed to understand response content.

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%, and the schema already explains that hash_key is a short string, not a numeric id. The description reinforces that the lookup is by hash_key but does not add meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: retrieving one connection by hash_key, and it clarifies that 'connection' means a client, vendor, or company. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from list_connections or get_contact, but the singular scope and hash_key identifier make its purpose 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?

Usage is implied by 'by hash_key': use this when you have a connection hash_key and need one record. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_connections, nor any stated exclusions or prerequisites.

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