query_graph

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the hard row ceiling, lack of offset support, and that response includes a 'total' count. However, it does not mention whether queries can be mutating (write operations) or if there are authorization or idempotency concerns.

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 sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: describing the tool's function and then providing critical usage constraints. No redundant or irrelevant information, and the key points are 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?

Given no output schema, the description mentions the 'total' field in the response, which is helpful. It also addresses the row limit and alternatives. However, it does not describe the full response structure, error conditions, or performance considerations, which would improve completeness for a complex query tool.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying the row ceiling behavior, recommending LIMIT usage, and pointing to 'search_graph' for pagination. It complements the schema which has partial coverage (project parameter lacking description). This helps an agent understand the constraints and proper usage of parameters.

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 executes Cypher queries for complex multi-hop patterns, aggregations, and cross-service analysis. It distinguishes from sibling 'search_graph' which supports paginated browsing, making the purpose and scope very clear.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to add LIMIT or use 'search_graph' for broad queries to avoid the 100k row ceiling. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for simple lookups or write operations).

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