Get Agent Stale Connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds the interpretation that 'stale' means needs reauthorization, which is helpful context. It does not disclose return format or pagination, but the safety profile is covered by annotations, so a moderate score is appropriate.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action and resource and immediately clarifies the meaning of 'stale'.

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 read-only tool with two fully described parameters and comprehensive annotations, the description is sufficient. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose and parameter scope, matching the completeness of high-quality filtered list tools.

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 100% with descriptions for both user_id and agent_id. The description does not add additional parameter-level details beyond what is in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource as 'an agent's stale tool connections', and clarifies that 'stale' means connections needing reauthorization. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_agent or credential list 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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need to identify an agent's connections that require reauthorization. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as referencing get_agent for general agent info or credential tools for all connections.

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