open_nodes

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

No annotations exist to describe behavior. The description only says 'open', implying read-only but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The agent is left uncertain about the tool's safety.

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, short sentence that conveys the core action and scope. It is not verbose, but could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the input but omits return value, pagination, or behavior on missing names. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 input schema fully describes the single parameter 'names' (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline 3 applies; no improvement or degradation.

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 states a clear verb 'open' and resource 'nodes in the knowledge graph', and distinguishes from siblings like search_nodes by specifying retrieval by names. However, 'open' is somewhat ambiguous (could imply display or retrieve), preventing a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like search_nodes or traverse_graph. The description lacks context about prerequisites or alternatives, leaving the agent without decision support.

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