retrieve_connections

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral aspects. It mentions retrieval, but does not clarify side effects (none expected), rate limits, or the ambiguous 'additional person-related actions'. The parenthetical internal action name adds no value for the agent.

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 very short at one sentence, which is concise. However, the inclusion of the parenthetical '(st.retrieveConnections action)' is unnecessary and slightly disrupts readability. It could be removed for better structure.

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 a nested filter object and no output schema, yet the description does not explain what the response contains (e.g., list of connection objects). It also does not elaborate on the 'additional person-related actions', leaving gaps in completeness.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains parameters like limit, since, and filter. The description adds no extra meaning, merely restating the purpose. A baseline of 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 clearly states the tool retrieves your connections, which is the core purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like check_connection_status or remove_connection, and the phrase 'perform additional person-related actions if needed' is vague and lacks specificity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_people or retrieve_pending_requests. The description simply states what it does without any when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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