onto_ingest

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states parsing and loading but does not address whether existing data is overwritten, transactional behavior, error handling, or authorization needs. Incomplete for a data ingestion tool.

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, highly efficient. Front-loaded with core purpose, followed by optional capability. 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?

Given no output schema and 5 parameters (1 required), the description covers main functionality but lacks details on return behavior, persistence, or integration with ontology store lifecycle. Adequate but could be more complete for a complex tool.

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 is 3. The description adds minimal context beyond schema (e.g., 'mapping config controls field-to-predicate mapping'), which aligns with schema descriptions. No significant new meaning.

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 verb (parse and load) and resource (structured data file into RDF triples in ontology store). It distinguishes from siblings like onto_import (which likely imports ontologies) and onto_load (loading existing triples) by specifying parsing from multiple formats and optional mapping.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like onto_import, onto_load, or onto_convert. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide explicit context for selection among siblings.

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