get_connection_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It says 'Get detailed information' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose whether special permissions are needed, whether it tests/accesses the database, or what information is considered 'detailed.' This is thin behavioral coverage.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is easy to parse, but it is too terse to provide meaningful behavioral detail, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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 no output schema and no annotation context, the agent does not know what 'detailed information' actually includes. Given related sibling tools like get_database_stats and test_connection, the description leaves the boundaries of this tool's output ambiguous, making it incomplete.

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 already describes connectionId as 'The ID or name of the database connection' with 100% coverage, leaving little room for interpretation. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning 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 uses a specific verb plus resource—'Get detailed information about a specific database connection'—making clear this is a single-connection lookup. It broadly differentiates from list_connections (which lists connections) and test_connection (which tests), but does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 phrase 'specific database connection' implies it should be used when you have a connectionId and need details about that one connection. However, no explicit guidance is given for when this should be used instead of test_connection, get_database_stats, or get_ssh_tunnel_info.

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