cleanup_material_graph

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Clearly states destructive nature, explains modes and dry_run behavior. Could mention return format or confirmation message, but output schema may cover return values.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive: one sentence for purpose, a warning paragraph, and structured parameter explanations. Front-loaded, no wasted words.

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 output schema exists (not shown), description covers all needed context: purpose, when to use/avoid, parameter details, and safety recommendation (dry_run). Complete for the tool's complexity.

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 0%, but description explains each parameter: mode with its three options, dry_run with its purpose and recommendation. Material_path is implicit in name. Adds significant meaning beyond schema.

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 the tool deletes orphaned and dead-end nodes from a material graph, using specific verb-resource pairing. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_material_expression by targeting connectivity cleanup rather than individual node deletion.

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?

Provides explicit warning to never call unless user explicitly requests cleanup, explains rationale (users may keep disconnected nodes intentionally), and recommends using dry_run first to preview. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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