navigate_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'navigate' without clarifying whether this is a read-only operation or mutates the current context, nor does it mention error handling, permissions, or output details. The meaning of 'using Wikilinks' is also underspecified.

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 a single, concise sentence with a parenthetical example list. Every part serves a purpose with no filler, making it highly efficient.

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 annotations and a tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks behavioral context, error behavior, and details about the workspace_path parameter, leaving critical gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides useful examples for node_path but entirely omits any explanation of workspace_path, its default, or its purpose. Thus, coverage of parameter semantics is incomplete.

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 navigates to a specific module or submodule node in the memory graph using Wikilinks, with concrete examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_nodes or create_module_node.

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 examples (e.g., 'modules/auth', 'decisions') convey clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, though the purpose is distinct enough to infer.

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