Get connector

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

The description adds the meaningful behavioral detail that 'Secret config values are redacted' and states the response includes config and tasks. Since no annotations are provided, however, it still does not disclose authentication, error behavior, or whether the operation is purely read-only beyond the 'get' wording.

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 short sentences with no filler. The main outcome is front-loaded, and the redaction caveat is appended as a separate valuable detail without bloating the description.

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 one-param tool with 100% schema coverage, the description explains what is returned (config + tasks) and flags the redaction caveat, which is enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. It does not detail the exact output shape or error behavior, but those are not required for a quick probe.

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 schema fully documents the single intended parameter with 'Connector name', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, which is acceptable because the schema already carries that burden.

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 states the operation clearly: fetch a connector and return 'Full connector info (config + tasks)'. The parenthetical scope distinguishes it from siblings like get_connector_config and get_connector_status, and the singular use implies one specific connector rather than a list.

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 no explicit guidance about when to use this tool over siblings such as get_connector_config or get_connector_status. It only hints at the broader scope ('config + tasks'), leaving an agent to infer the use case without clear alternatives or exclusions.

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