query_infra_graph

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Ask the graph a question' without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or required permissions. The output format is not hinted, even though an output schema exists.

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 sentence with examples, containing zero wasted words and placing the core action upfront. It is appropriately concise.

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 the tool's complexity (many sibling tools, one parameter, output schema exists), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the output format, how it differs from similar tools, or provide usage context beyond simple examples.

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 single parameter 'question' has 0% schema description coverage, but the description adds meaning by specifying it is a natural language question and provides examples. However, it does not clarify syntax, length limits, or how to structure complex queries.

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 states 'Ask the graph a question' with clear verb 'ask' and resource 'the graph', and provides two examples. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like list_dependencies or list_dependents, which may have overlapping functionality.

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 provides examples but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. There is no mention of when not to use it or what alternative tools exist for different scenarios.

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