explore_dag

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

Describes returned data (metadata, tasks, source code, errors) and states it combines multiple pieces in one call. With no annotations, this provides good transparency, but does not explicitly declare read-only nature.

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?

Well-structured with sections for purpose, usage, args, returns. Slightly verbose in usage section but still efficient.

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 one parameter, no annotations, and output schema exists, the description comprehensively covers purpose, usage, parameter, and return data.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description includes 'Args: dag_id: The ID of the DAG to explore', fully clarifying the parameter's purpose.

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 'Comprehensive investigation of a DAG - get all relevant info in one call' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by noting it avoids multiple calls and is the preferred first tool.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios: when user asks 'Tell me about DAG X' or needs to understand structure before diagnosis. Does not explicitly exclude cases where a more specific tool is better, but implies general context.

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