kremis_traverse

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It lacks details on traversal direction (outgoing/incoming), cycle handling, result formatting, or performance implications. The minimal description 'discover connected entities' is vague.

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 concise sentence (9 words) with no fluff. However, given the tool's complexity, a slightly more detailed description might be warranted, but it is still efficiently written.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to explain the return value, traversal algorithm behavior, or how depth and top_k interact. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate; no additional param context is provided.

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 'traverse' and identifies the resource 'graph from a node' and the outcome 'discover connected entities'. It clearly states the tool's function but does not differentiate from sibling tools like kremis_lookup or kremis_path.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not provide context on appropriate use cases or contrast with sibling tools.

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