Importar grafo de Maltego o CSV

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

Annotations declare a non-destructive, idempotent write; the description reinforces this with merge semantics ("fusiona") and notes that Maltego memory is carried over when present. That is genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about conflict handling on duplicate entities.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the action and formats, followed by the file-location constraint. No filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not say what is returned after a merge (imported counts, skipped rows) or how duplicates are resolved. Against an annotation set that already covers the safety profile, this is a minor but real gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so case_id and file_name are already documented; the description still adds value by enumerating the two file types and the exact CSV column contract, which the schema does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb (importa/fusiona) plus the resource (a .mtgx Maltego graph or a CSV) and the destination (a case). The import direction and both accepted formats make it unambiguously distinct from the export sibling.

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?

Gives a clear precondition — the file must live in ~/.maltego-mcp/imports (or exports) — which is essential to calling it correctly. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name an alternative workflow, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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