datamodel.get_connection

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false annotations by disclosing the HTTP method, endpoint, query parameter, return type, and the error shape on failure or no match. Minor operational details like authentication requirements are not mentioned, but for a read-only GET operation this is acceptable.

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?

Two compact sentences with the action and endpoint front-loaded, followed only by the return behavior. There is no redundancy or filler, and every sentence contributes useful information.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies what is retrieved, how the request is made, what the matching data looks like, and what happens on failure or no match. No critical information needed to use the tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema already fully describes connection_name with 100% coverage. The description adds that the parameter becomes the name query parameter in the request, but provides no additional constraints, formatting rules, or semantics beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve connections matching a name' and gives the exact endpoint GET /api/v2/connections?name=<connection_name>. The name-based filter distinguishes this from the sibling datamodel_get_connections_all, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving connections by name, which provides clear context for invocation. It does not explicitly name the alternative for getting all connections or list when-not-to-use conditions, but the intended usage is explicit rather than merely implied.

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