knowmind_list_relations

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. Description adds context by saying 'Read scope suffices' and explaining the intended use case, reinforcing safety but not contradicting annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundant wording. The structure clearly separates what the tool does from when to use it, and includes necessary cross-references.

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 single parameter and clear purpose, the description covers all necessary context: what it returns, when to use it, and how to get the required ID. No gaps for the user to infer.

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?

The only parameter memory_id is fully described in the schema (including how to obtain it). The description repeats this but does not add new meaning, so baseline 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?

Clearly states the tool lists all relations of a memory, both incoming and outgoing, with edge type and connected node, distinguishing it from sibling tools like knowmind_link and knowmind_recall.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use it: before adding or removing edges with knowmind_link/knowmind_unlink, and instructs to get memory_id via knowmind_recall, plus notes that read scope is sufficient.

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