constrained_delegation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it does not state that this is a read-only query, whether it executes a fixed or customizable query, or what the response looks like. The phrase 'requête vérifiée' vaguely alludes to safety but is ambiguous and not explanatory.

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 short noun phrase, so it is technically concise with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified, missing a verb and actionable content, making it less effective than a complete yet compact sentence.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and only two parameters, but the description does not explain how to invoke the tool, what the parameters mean, or any constraints. It does not mention that this is a specialized wrapper around a Cypher query, nor how it relates to run_cypher.

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%, and the description does not explain the purpose of parameters 'k' or 'cy'. The default value of 'cy' provides a full Cypher query, offering some implicit semantics, but the description itself adds no parameter-level meaning or usage guidance.

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 names the resource ('Principals with constrained delegation') and the output ('their allowed targets'), establishing subject matter, but it lacks a verb and does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like unconstrained_delegation or run_cypher. It is more of a label than an explicit statement of action.

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 alternatives such as run_cypher or unconstrained_delegation. There is no mention of prerequisites, whether the query is read-only, or any conditions under which this tool is preferred.

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