get_user_connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral traits: authentication requirement nuance ('works without auth; richer with auth') and rate limiting ('Subject to per-tool rate limiting'). It does not discuss error handling or response format, but output schema covers that.

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 three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds authentication nuance, usage direction, alternatives, and rate limiting. Every sentence serves a clear function.

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?

With 4 parameters, output schema present, and good annotations, the description covers authentication, direction usage, alternatives, and rate limiting. It does not explain pagination beyond the cursor parameter, but the schema handles that. The tool is well-documented for its complexity.

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% with clear descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds value by explaining the direction enum values in context ('Use direction='followers' to get who follows the actor or direction='follows'...'), which reinforces the schema. Limit and cursor are inferred but not elaborated; still, the description enhances comprehension.

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 explicitly states 'Retrieve an account's followers or follows from AT Protocol,' providing a clear verb (Retrieve) and resource (followers/follows). It distinguishes from siblings by recommending get_user_profile or get_user_summary for aggregate counts, avoiding role confusion.

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 when-to-use guidance: 'Works without authentication; richer with auth' and 'use get_user_profile or get_user_summary for aggregate counts instead.' It also explains the direction parameter usage, helping the agent choose between followers and follows.

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