get_deps

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes the output as a graph but does not mention side effects, performance, or whether it is read-only. The description is minimal beyond the basic function.

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 concise with a one-line summary and a clear parameter list. It avoids unnecessary information and is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

While the tool has an output schema, the description provides the basic purpose and parameter details. However, it lacks explanation of the returned graph's structure, potential errors, or performance considerations, making it somewhat incomplete for a complex tool.

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 description explains the 'notebook' parameter as 'Path to the notebook file or port number' and 'cell_id' as 'Optional cell ID to get deps for a specific cell only', adding significant meaning beyond the schema's type-only specifications. With 0% schema description coverage, this provides necessary context.

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 'get the cell dependency graph' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_cells or get_variables. It specifies the output as 'showing which cells depend on which variables', leaving no ambiguity.

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 for retrieving dependency information but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or context when the tool is appropriate.

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