peaka_get_connection_detail

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds important context that the response shape varies by connection type and only `type` is guaranteed, which is especially useful since no output schema exists. It also mentions the projectId discovery workflow.

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 paragraphs with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by a response-variability caveat and then the prerequisite workflow. Every sentence adds 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 read-only lookup with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter provenance, the projectId workflow, and the variable response shape. It could enumerate possible connection types or common fields, but that is not necessary for correct invocation.

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 descriptions already cover both parameters at 100% coverage. The description adds workflow guidance for discovering projectId and connectionId, but it does not add new type or format semantics beyond what the schema provides. 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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'Get connection-specific configuration detail for a data source connection.' It also distinguishes itself from peaka_list_connections by focusing on singular detail and explicitly pointing to list_connections for discovery.

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?

Provides a clear workflow: use peaka_list_connections to discover the connectionId, call peaka_list_projects if the projectId is unknown, ask the user to choose, and remember the chosen projectId. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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