ckg_inspect

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

Describes output (typed edges, confidence scores) and mentions graph traversal, implying read-only behavior. However, no explicit statement about side effects or permissions. Without annotations, the description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and outputs, then adding usage guidance and related concepts. No unnecessary 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?

Adequately covers purpose, parameters, and output hints for a tool with simple schema and no output schema. Lacks details on result structure or pagination, but sufficient for typical use.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds contextual examples for 'concept' (e.g., 'fix:clickhouse-ipv6'), enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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?

A specific verb (Inspect) and resource (Causal Knowledge Graph) with types of edges listed (fixes, requires, co-occurs, causes) and mention of Bayesian confidence scores, clearly differentiating from sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use to understand what the brain knows about a topic and which fixes have the highest confidence', providing a clear use case, though no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned.

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