linkedin_get_connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context about pagination performance ('Large networks take a while to page through'), which is not captured in annotations, thus enriching transparency.

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 two sentences: the first front-loads the exact purpose and return fields, the second delivers a concise, actionable performance tip. Every word earns its place with no redundant or vague filler.

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 read-only list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is fully self-sufficient. It states what the tool does, what the response contains, and warns about performance, requiring no additional context to invoke correctly.

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 fully documents both parameters (limit defaults to 50, refresh bypasses cache) with 100% coverage. The description goes beyond by explaining the rationale for the limit parameter—pagination time in large networks—adding meaningful context that helps the agent choose appropriate values.

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 the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'the signed-in user's 1st-degree connections', including the exact data returned (names, headlines, profile links). This sharply distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_export_connections or linkedin_get_contact_info.

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 provides clear context that this tool operates on the signed-in user's network and offers a practical usage tip about setting a realistic limit due to slow paging through large networks. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use it, so it misses the upper bound.

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