near

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds the useful detail that evidence quotes are included, but does not explain how the 'hops' parameter affects traversal or mention any other behavioral caveats. This is adequate but not rich.

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 one-sentence description is extremely concise and front-loaded, containing no fluff. While it sacrifices detail, it is perfectly sized for a simple tool description.

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?

Despite the output schema, the description is incomplete: it omits the meaning of 'hops', provides no context for when to use the tool, and does not clarify its relationship to sibling tools. A brief usage example or parameter explanation would make it more complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It implies 'entity' is the target entity, but 'hops' is entirely unexplained. This is a significant gap for a knowledge graph traversal tool.

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 indicates the tool returns facts about a single entity, with evidence quotes. It identifies the resource (knowledge graph) and scope (one entity), but uses no explicit verb and does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 given on when to use this tool versus search, fetch, recall, why, or remember. The description only says what it does, leaving the agent to infer its place among alternatives.

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