visualise

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

No annotations provided, but the description compensates fully: discloses truncation behavior (capped at limit, most-connected first), precedence (memory_id over domain), output fields, rendering behavior, and magnitude of truncation via nodes_total vs node_count.

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?

Single paragraph that front-loads main purpose but is relatively long and dense. Some redundancy (e.g., 'Output the mermaid string inside a ```mermaid code block' could be implied). Acceptable but not optimal.

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?

With no output schema, description thoroughly explains all return fields and their meaning. Covers both modes and truncation handling. No required parameters, yet covers all use cases. Refers to sibling tool for a specific alternative use case.

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% so baseline 3; description adds value: notes precedence rule for memory_id, explains default/max for limit, and prioritization logic for truncation. A small bonus for useful context beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool generates a Mermaid.js flowchart with two modes (memory_id for single memory neighborhood, domain for full graph). It distinguishes from sibling tools like audit and domains.

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 tells when to use each parameter (memory_id vs domain) and explicitly states when not to use it (orphan detection) with a direct reference to the alternative tool audit(mode=orphans).

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