Get DataLens connection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds non-obvious behavior: the response uses db_type instead of type, and passwords/tokens are never returned, which is important for security expectations.

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?

Three short paragraphs: purpose first, then the db_type nuance, then security and an alternative. No filler; every sentence carries actionable information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must cover return values; it names the main returned fields and the db_type field, plus a secrets warning. It does not detail settings structure or error behavior, but for a read-only get with full input schema coverage this is close to complete.

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%, so all four parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or filtering details beyond noting lookup by id, so it does not exceed the baseline of 3.

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?

States it retrieves a single connection by id and enumerates the high-level returned fields (name, kind, settings of that kind). The note contrasting db_type with create's type and the reference to workbooks_entries_list distinguishes it from sibling create/list tools.

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?

Names the alternative datalens_workbooks_entries_list for finding a workbook's connections, implying this tool is for when the connection id is known. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list other prerequisites, so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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