maltego_set_active_graph

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint true, readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false. The description aligns: it confirms making a graph active returns confirmation/error. It adds no new behavioral traits beyond confirming the action is on an already-open graph, which is already implied. Minimal added value over 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?

The description is extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, then a bullet for Args and Returns. No fluff, front-loaded with actionable verb. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one parameter, the description covers the action, required input, and expected output (confirmation/error). There is no missing information given the low complexity. The output schema is not shown but described sufficiently.

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 input schema already describes the required 'name' parameter as 'Name of an already-open graph to make active.' The tool description repeats this info (name as string) but adds a reference to malteco_list_graphs. Since schema coverage is effectively 100% with its own description, the tool description adds little new semantic value.

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 'Make a previously-opened graph the active target for entity/link operations.' It specifies the verb ('Make active'), resource (graph), and distinguishes from sibling tools like malteco_create_graph or malteco_open_graph by emphasizing 'previously-opened'.

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 implies usage after opening a graph and references malteco_list_graphs. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the list_graphs hint. A stronger exclusion could improve it.

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