get_neighbors

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'edge details' but does not specify what details (e.g., direction, properties), nor does it mention pagination, performance, or resource impact. This is minimal disclosure.

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?

Single sentence of 9 words. No filler, front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate for a simple neighbor lookup but lacks details on output structure (node vs edge format, order). It covers basic functionality.

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 coverage is 67% (2 of 3 params described). The description adds no extra meaning to any parameter; the undocument label param is not explained. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already provides most info.

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 'Get all direct neighbors of a node with edge details' clearly states the action (get), the resource (direct neighbors), and distinguishes from siblings like get_node (single node) and shortest_path (paths).

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 when direct neighbors with edge details are needed, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Sibling tools like get_node or shortest_path are not referenced.

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