graph_graph_create

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'create' but omits side effects like whether creation overwrites an existing graph, requires specific permissions, or results in a persistent graph. This lack of detail reduces transparency.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the key action and resource. However, the brevity comes at the cost of missing essential information, making it slightly less effective than a well-balanced description.

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?

Given that the tool has an output schema (details unknown) and is a fundamental creation tool, the description fails to explain the return value, the default state of the graph, or how it integrates with other graph tools. This incompleteness limits the agent's understanding.

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 single 'name' parameter is documented only in the schema with just a title. The description adds no additional meaning, such as constraints on uniqueness, format, or character restrictions. With 0% schema coverage, more detail is needed.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('named directed graph'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling graph tools such as graph_graph_delete or graph_graph_add_edge. It directly conveys the tool's primary function.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as graph_graph_add_node or graph_graph_list. There is no mention of prerequisites, error scenarios (e.g., duplicate name), or typical use cases.

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