Create Node

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the active-session requirement, that new nodes start fully active, and that an embedding is generated for semantic search. It stops short of describing the response or how relates_to failures are handled.

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?

Three tight sentences with no filler, and the core purpose plus the session prerequisite are front-loaded. Slightly list-like but every clause carries information.

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, so ideally the description would hint at what is returned (e.g. the new node ID). It compensates well by covering prerequisites, default activation state, embedding generation, and linking, which is nearly everything needed to call 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 100%, so enum values for type/status, defaults for project/container, and the max-20 limit on relates_to are already documented. The description only restates the linking capability and embedding behavior, which adds marginal value over the schema.

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+resource ('Create a knowledge node') and enumerates the node kinds, plus the side effects of embedding generation and relate_to linking. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with kg_node_update or kg_relate.

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 description gives an important precondition ('Requires an active session'), which implies the tool is used mid-session. However, it never says when to create a new node versus updating an existing one via kg_node_update, or when linking should be handled by kg_relate instead.

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