Expand Tool Graph

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds significant behavior context: traversal depth limits (default 2, max 4), relation types (REQUIRES, WORKS_WITH, etc.), example output, and explanation of how dependencies are returned. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured with sections for arguments, relation types, returns, and usage tip. It is informative but slightly verbose; could be more concise by merging the argument list with the existing schema documentation. Still, 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?

Given no output schema, the description provides an example JSON response, lists all relation types, and explains the depth and filter parameters. For a tool with 4 parameters, this is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand inputs and outputs.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds value by providing an example of tool_name ('n8n-workflow-builder'), explaining relation types, and showing the response format. This goes beyond the schema's basic property descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: 'Expand a tool to find its dependencies via Knowledge Graph.' It uses a specific verb ('expand') and resource ('tool'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like toolhub_search, toolhub_health, and toolhub_cluster by focusing on dependency 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?

The description provides a clear usage guideline: 'Use this tool when you know a primary tool and need to find related tools.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or directly compare with alternatives, such as using toolhub_search for broader search instead of dependency traversal.

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