connector_protect_get

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

Without annotations, the description discloses the forwarding behavior and raises, but does not cover rate limits, idempotency, or side effects. The mention of required site manager settings adds some context.

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 well-structured with sections for arguments, returns, and raises, and is concise without fluff.

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 existence of an output schema and the proxy nature, the description covers the main purpose and basic behavior, but lacks detail on authentication and header forwarding.

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 description provides context for console_id and path, and mentions params, but includes a 'settings' parameter not in the input schema, causing confusion. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description adds some but incomplete value.

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 clearly states it proxies a GET request to the Protect Application via Cloud Connector, distinguishing it from sibling tools with different HTTP methods.

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 implicitly differentiates usage via its HTTP method name and sibling names (e.g., connector_protect_delete), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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