graph.catalog.import_csv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'import', implying a write operation, but gives no details about side effects (e.g., does it replace existing data? require prior empty state? handle conflicts?). Security, idempotency, and error behavior are not addressed.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structuring (e.g., parameters, usage notes, examples). It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices clarity.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides none of the needed context: no explanation of the CSV format, required order, or relationship between parameters. For a complex import operation, this is severely incomplete.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not even mention the five parameters (domains_csv, projects_csv, relations_csv, categories_csv, schema_version). The default empty strings and required semantics are left entirely unspecified, making the tool difficult to invoke correctly.

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?

Description clearly states the tool imports a graph catalog from a CSV bundle. It uses a specific verb ('Import') and resource ('catalog do grafo'), making the purpose obvious. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'graph.catalog.export_csv', which is the inverse operation.

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 alternatives (e.g., individual CRUD tools for domains, projects, etc.). The description does not mention prerequisites, context of use, or scenarios where this import is appropriate.

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