sd_get_graph_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds some context ('bounded', 'versioned', 'explicit connections') but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as default limits or the meaning of 'explicit connections' beyond what the annotations imply.

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, front-loaded with the action verb, and contains no redundant or filler content. Every word contributes meaning.

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 the presence of strong annotations and an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, terms like 'versioned' and 'explicit connections' are domain-specific and not elaborated, which could leave an agent uncertain about the tool's exact scope. The description is adequate but not highly 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (graph, limit, include_values). The word 'bounded' hints at the limit parameter, but the nested GraphRef and include_values remain undocumented in the description, leaving the schema to carry full semantic weight.

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 a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('a bounded versioned graph snapshot') and adds a distinguishing detail ('including explicit connections'), which differentiates this from sibling tools like sd_get_active_graph or sd_list_graph_nodes.

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 implies a use case (read a versioned snapshot with connections) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are present.

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