mempalace_kg_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool returns typed facts with temporal validity, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or what happens if the entity is not found.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and includes a concrete example. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words.

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 there is no output schema, the description briefly explains returns ('typed facts with temporal validity') but lacks detail on the structure of the response (e.g., format of types, how facts are grouped). For a query tool with 3 parameters, it covers most essential behavior but could be more complete on output formatting.

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 100%, but the description adds meaning: it explains that 'as_of' filters to facts valid at a given date and that 'direction' controls whether relationships are incoming, outgoing, or both. The example also provides concrete parameter values ('Max').

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 action ('Query the knowledge graph'), the resource (knowledge graph for an entity's relationships), and the output ('typed facts with temporal validity'). The example 'Max → child_of Alice, loves chess, does swimming' further clarifies. It distinguishes from siblings like mempalace_kg_add and mempalace_kg_invalidate.

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 an example and mentions filtering by date with 'as_of', implying typical usage. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like mempalace_kg_timeline or mempalace_find_tunnels, nor does it state when not to use it.

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