NeoCoder Neo4j AI Workflow

write_neo4j_cypher

Execute Cypher write queries to create, update, or delete data in Neo4j. Provide query parameters for safe, dynamic graph modifications in AI workflows.

Instructions

Execute a WRITE Cypher query (for creating/updating data).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "write_neo4j_cypher"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Cypher query to execute (CREATE, DELETE, MERGE, etc.)
`params`	No	Query parameters

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool performs writes but omits that it can also delete data (as shown in the schema) and does not mention side effects, irreversibility, or transaction behavior. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose efficiently. The parenthetical 'for creating/updating data' is slightly misleading because it excludes DELETE, but overall the description is appropriately concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has a simple schema and an output schema, so return values need no explanation. However, the description lacks critical context for a write tool: it does not mention that DELETE is allowed, nor does it address side effects, prerequisites, or when to avoid this tool. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's impact.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% with meaningful descriptions for both query and params. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it executes a WRITE Cypher query for creating/updating data, using a specific verb and resource. The uppercase 'WRITE' distinguishes it from read-only query tools, and the tool name reinforces the intent.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this tool should be used for write operations (creating/updating data) but does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives like run_custom_query for read queries. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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