sd_open_graph

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

The description does not disclose any side effects, such as changing the current view, closing unsaved work, or requiring specific permissions. Annotations are present but all hints are false, so they provide no positive safety profile. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 no redundant words, making it easy to read. However, it is arguably too terse, providing only the bare minimum of 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?

Given that this tool likely mutates the editor state by opening a graph, the description lacks important context about what counts as a 'graph resource', whether the operation is reversible, or what the output schema indicates. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the description still misses critical behavioral context.

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 mention the 'graph' parameter or its sub-fields (package_url, graph_identifier, graph_type). The schema provides some structure but the description adds no meaning to help an agent construct valid arguments.

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 identifies the action (open) and the resource (a graph resource) in a specific context (Designer's editor). It is distinguished from siblings by using the verb 'open' which is unique among the listed tools, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sd_get_active_graph or sd_get_graph_snapshot. The description implies a single use case but offers no exclusions or context.

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