connection_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds value by noting 'secret-safe values,' which implies masking of sensitive data. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency, read-only nature, or potential side effects, making it partially adequate.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Return,' and no extraneous words. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has no parameters or output schema. The description explains the output category (connection info) and a safe-handling qualifier. However, without output schema, it could specify the structure or keys returned. Also, it does not differentiate from vault_connection_info, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the schema fully covers parameters.

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 tool returns connection information for MCP server, Vault, and Postgres, with secret-safe values. It uses a specific verb and resource list, distinguishing it from highly specialized siblings like vault_connection_info, though it could be more explicit about the scope.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., vault_connection_info) or when not to use it. The description lacks context on prerequisites or alternative tools, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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