neo4j_search_relationships

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the search pattern and filter capabilities, and mentions limit defaults/maximums. However, it does not describe side effects, permissions, or behavior when no results are found, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 well-structured with a one-line summary, the pattern, and an Args list. It is appropriately front-loaded. A minor improvement could be consolidating repeated references to the pattern, but overall it is clear and not verbose.

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 an output schema exists, the description adequately covers search inputs without needing to detail return values. It provides all necessary filter information but could mention edge cases like empty results or handling of null property filters for full completeness.

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 input schema has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description adds full meaning for all 6 parameters: from_label, from_properties, rel_type, to_label, to_properties, and limit (with default and max). This is critical for correct tool use.

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 relationships (edges) in Neo4j, specifying the exact pattern (from_node)-[rel]->(to_node). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like neo4j_search (which likely searches nodes) and neo4j_query (general Cypher queries).

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 finding relationships matching filters, and sibling names provide context (e.g., neo4j_search for nodes). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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