memory_export_graph

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It accurately describes the tool as non-destructive (export), discloses file output with default path, and lists return fields. No hidden behaviors or side effects are mentioned, but it is sufficiently transparent for a read-like operation.

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 (3 lines plus structured Args and Returns). Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameters, and return type. No redundancy or filler.

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?

With 2 optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers all needed context: what the tool does, input options with defaults, and return structure. No gaps identified.

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?

Both parameters (output_path and min_score) are described with default values and purpose. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully, adding meaning beyond the schema alone (e.g., default path, score threshold for edges).

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?

Description clearly states the tool exports memories as an interactive HTML knowledge graph. The verb 'export' and resource 'memories as graph' are specific, distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory_export (likely plain text) and memory_related (which returns related memories but does not export).

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 does not explicitly state when or when not to use this tool. The purpose is implied by the name and description (visualization), but there is no guidance on alternatives or prerequisites. It provides parameter details but lacks contextual decision support.

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