arango_create_graph

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'optionally creating collections' via the create_collections parameter. It does not disclose failure behavior if the graph exists, permission requirements, or whether the operation is destructive.

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?

A single, clear sentence that concisely states the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 4 parameters, low schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks explanation of what a named graph is, the pattern of edge definitions, and expected behavior (e.g., whether existing collections are reused).

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 low (25%)—only the 'database' parameter has a description. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what is in the schema. It does not explain the 'edge_definitions' structure or the effect of 'create_collections'.

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 creates a named graph with edge definitions, and optionally creates collections. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'arango_add_edge_definition' or 'arango_create_collection', which have different purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain prerequisites (e.g., database must exist) or when to use 'arango_add_edge_definition' instead.

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