get_tcp_connections

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

Description only says 'list' with no behavioral details. Since annotations are absent, the description should disclose whether it is read-only, performance implications, or what 'active' means. It does not.

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, and efficient. Could be improved by adding a brief note on scope or safety, but is appropriately sized for its simplicity.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description lacks context on when to use, what 'active' means, or potential side effects. For a tool with no annotations, this is incomplete.

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% (vacuously). Baseline is 4 per rule for zero parameters, though description adds no additional 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?

Description clearly states verb 'list' and resource 'active TCP and TLS connections'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'tls_connections' which may also list connections.

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 alternatives such as 'tls_connections' or 'rtpengine_sessions'. The description does not provide context or exclusions.

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