get_graph

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

Discloses return structure (nodes and edges), but with no annotations, the description carries full burden. Does not mention performance implications, read-only nature, or scope of the graph (e.g., all notes or active note). Adequate for a simple read operation.

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. Action verb 'Get' front-loaded, directly followed by return description and usage guidance. 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the key purpose and return format. Could mention scope (e.g., 'for all notes') but not required. Adequately complete.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, but baseline for 0 params is 4. No further semantic value needed.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves the knowledge graph showing relationships between notes, specifying return of nodes and edges. Distinguishes from siblings like get_backlinks (which gives backlinks) and search_notes (search functionality).

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?

Implies usage ('Use this to understand how notes connect to each other') but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, such as when get_backlinks or search_notes would be more appropriate. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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