get_connects

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructiveness, so the description only adds cluster scoping to that safety profile. It does not disclose pagination or filtering behavior implied by page, perPage, and search, though nothing contradicts the read-only hints.

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?

One concise sentence with no redundant words; the action and scope are front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 list with no output schema, the description is minimally viable, but it omits pagination/search behavior and does not hint at the return shape of a 'connect definition.' The agent still has to infer several details from parameter names and sibling 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?

Only 2 of 5 parameters have schema descriptions (40% coverage), and the description adds no detail about page, search, or perPage semantics. The required cluster and connectId parameters are only loosely reinforced by the phrase 'for a cluster,' leaving optional parameters underspecified.

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 action ('List all'), a resource ('connect definitions'), and a scoping context ('for a cluster'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as get_connect_by_name and get_connect_configs, which target a single or filtered item.

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 'List all' gives a clear retrieval context and implies this is the plural/listing counterpart to get_connect_by_name. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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