get_connect_by_name

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

The description aligns with the annotations: readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false all match 'Get'. However, it adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already declare, such as not-found behavior, response shape, or whether the definition includes configs and tasks.

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 concise sentence that directly states the action and target. It avoids repetition, fluff, or schema duplication, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

This is a simple, read-only lookup tool with three fully documented required parameters and read-only annotations. However, with no output schema, the description does not explain what a 'connect definition' contains or what happens if no matching definition is found. It is minimally viable but leaves a few practical gaps.

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 each parameter and its role is already documented. The description adds no additional meaning about how cluster, connectId, and name relate or how they should be combined to identify a specific connect definition.

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: 'Get a specific connect definition'. This clearly indicates a targeted fetch by name, and the tool's name further disambiguates it from the sibling get_connects, which lists connects. It could be stronger by explicitly naming related siblings, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_connects, get_connect_configs, or get_connect_tasks. The word 'specific' implies a by-name lookup, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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