connector_network_get

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It states the request is forwarded and returns raw response, and lists raised exceptions (ValidationError, ValueError). However, it mentions a 'settings' parameter that does not appear in the input schema, creating confusion about tool behavior.

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?

Description is structured with Args/Returns/Raises sections, which aids readability. However, it includes a parameter ('settings') not present in the schema, adding confusion. It could be more concise by removing the erroneous parameter.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a proxy GET, the description covers the basic behavior and error cases. It references output schema implicitly ('raw response'), but lacks details on pagination or response structure. More context on how path relates to the Network API would improve completeness.

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 0%, so description must explain parameters. It describes 'console_id' and 'path' with examples and 'params' as optional query parameters. However, it also lists a 'settings' argument that is not in the schema, which is misleading and contradictory. This reduces effectiveness.

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 it proxies a GET request to the Network Application via Cloud Connector, specifying the verb and resource. It differentiates itself from sibling tools that handle other HTTP methods (DELETE, PATCH, POST, PUT) for the same connector.

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?

Description implies usage for retrieving data from the Network API via proxy but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions required settings (UNIFI_SITE_MANAGER_ENABLED) but lacks guidance on when not to use it.

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