zeek_connection_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully inform behavior. It indicates a read-only 'statistical summary', but lacks disclosure on potential side effects, authentication needs, or behavior with empty time ranges. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. No wasted words.

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?

With 3 parameters (none required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fairly complete for a summary tool but omits details like output structure, limits, or error handling. Could be more thorough.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add semantic value beyond the schema; it enumerates summary fields but doesn't explain how parameters like groupBy or time range influence those fields.

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 the tool retrieves a 'statistical summary of connections' with specific metrics ('top talkers, services, bytes, and connection counts'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like zeek_query_connections (raw data) or other specialized zeek 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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., zeek_query_connections for raw data, zeek_detect_anomalies for anomalous patterns). Usage is implied but not contrasted.

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