summarize_view

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context: return fields (including relationships not yet drawn) and specific error conditions (ModelNotFoundError, ViewNotFoundError). No contradictions.

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 with a clear structure: a one-line summary followed by Args, Returns, Errors sections. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 the tool has only one parameter, is read-only, and has an output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what it does, what it returns, and possible errors. No gaps remain.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by documenting the single parameter 'view_id: ID of the view to summarize.' This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definition.

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 uses a specific verb ('Summarize') and resource ('a single view'), and lists exactly what it returns: node count, connection count, gaps. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that modify or create views.

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?

While the purpose is clear, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It is implied that this is for getting summary statistics before or after modifications, but no exclusions or scenarios are provided.

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