get_connection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states a read operation ('gets details') but does not disclose error behavior, permission requirements, or whether the tool is non-destructive beyond the verb itself. The simplicity of the operation mitigates the lack of detail.

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 a single sentence of eight words, effectively front-loaded with the verb 'Gets'. No redundant content or filler.

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 simple getter with one parameter and an output schema, the description provides the essential purpose. It lacks context about error handling or when to use sibling tools, but the tool's straightforward nature makes this acceptable.

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 has one parameter (connection_id) with 0% description coverage. The description's 'specific connection' implies that connection_id identifies the target, but it adds little beyond the schema's 'Connection Id' title. For a single simple parameter, this is minimal but adequate.

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 'Gets details for a specific connection,' which clearly identifies the action (gets) and resource (connection details). It distinguishes from siblings like list_connections, which lists all connections, and create/update/delete 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?

The description implies the tool is used when a specific connection ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like list_connections. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided.

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