neo4j_search

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It explains search types and limit defaults, but omits details like case sensitivity, response structure, or error behavior. Output schema may cover return format, but not fully compensating.

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 and well-structured: purpose first, then usage alternatives, then parameter list. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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?

Considering the tool's complexity (two modes, 4 params) and no annotations, the description is fairly complete. It lacks details on return format (though output schema exists) and error handling, but overall covers essential usage.

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%, so description fully compensates. It explains each parameter's purpose, expected format (e.g., exact match dict, LIKE query), and constraints (default 25, max 100). This adds significant value beyond schema types.

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 searches for Neo4j nodes, with two distinct modes: label+properties or query. It distinguishes from siblings like neo4j_search_relationships and neo4j_query.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on using one of the two modes (label+properties or query), but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use this tool over siblings.

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