wisdom_get_relations

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not clarify return behavior, whether both directions are returned by default, or whether the entity may appear as source, target, or both.

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 waste-free sentence that front-loads the core action. It is appropriately short, though it is concise at the cost of omitting useful behavioral and contextual details.

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?

For a simple two-parameter getter whose schema documents all parameters, the description is minimally usable. However, with no output schema and no mention of direction semantics or result shape, it is not fully self-sufficient for an agent choosing among relation-related siblings.

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 100%, and both parameters are already documented clearly in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('relations for an entity'), clearly identifying a read/query action. It is not a tautology and is understandable on its own, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from relation-adjacent siblings like wisdom_check_derivation_chain.

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 instead of alternatives such as wisdom_create_relation, wisdom_get_fragment, or wisdom_find_contradictions. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context from the tool name alone.

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