dijkstra

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: returns distance and path, error if unreachable, weight_property defaults to 1.0. Includes error recovery steps, leaving little ambiguity.

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded purpose, usage guidelines, and parameter details. Minor redundancy in repeating parameter info that could be inferred from schema, but justified due to lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Covers algorithm, parameters, return format, error handling, and sibling differentiation. Provides enough context for correct agent invocation even without annotations or output schema descriptions.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all three parameters: source_id (starting node), target_id (destination), weight_property (edge property, optional, default 1.0). Also describes return structure.

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 finds the shortest weighted path between two nodes using Dijkstra's algorithm. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pagerank and vector_search, specifying the exact algorithm and resource.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (shortest/cheapest path between known nodes) and when not to (use pagerank for important nodes, vector_search for similar content), providing clear alternatives.

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