hierarchy_tree

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full transparency burden. It discloses the two modes and version number, but does not mention any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or output format. Basic behavior is covered, but deeper traits missing.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with version and core purpose. Efficiently explains both modes and use case. Highly concise.

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?

No output schema exists, so description should explain return format. It does not describe the nested JSON structure or error cases. For a simple read tool, it's adequate but not complete. Sibling tools likely share similar output, but agent still needs clarity on what 'nested JSON' means.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'root'. Description adds meaning by stating 'returns just that subtree' vs 'returns all root entities', which aligns with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds marginal 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?

Description clearly states the tool returns a hierarchy tree as nested JSON, with two distinct modes (with root returns subtree, without returns all root entities). Uses specific verb 'returns' and resource 'hierarchy tree'. Distinguishes itself from siblings like get_children, get_descendants, get_subtree by focusing on nested JSON output.

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?

States 'Useful for visualising parent/child structure' which implies when to use, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. With many sibling tree-related tools, more precise context would help an agent select correctly.

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