pulsar_connector_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states 'Get' implying read-only, but offers no detail on authentication, rate limits, error handling, or behavior when the connector does not exist. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words. Every word serves to define the tool's action and resource, achieving maximum efficiency.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief. It omits details about what the configuration includes, return format, and error cases. This leaves agents with incomplete information for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter (connector_name) described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it simply echoes the schema's purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get' and resource 'configuration of a specific connector', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like pulsar_connector_status (status) and pulsar_list_connectors (list all connectors).

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 implies usage for retrieving connector configuration but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pulsar_connector_status or pulsar_list_connectors. No exclusion criteria or alternative mentions.

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