query_path

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully states that an empty list is returned when no path exists and defines each entry as {uid, title, type}, but it does not clarify whether the path includes the endpoints, whether the graph is directed, how ties are broken, or what happens with invalid UIDs.

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?

The description is three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes the return shape and empty-result behavior without unnecessary wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not fully explain return values, though it does describe the entry shape. For a simple two-parameter query tool, the definition is adequate but leaves gaps around parameter meaning, directedness, and usage relative to sibling query tools.

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 0%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented uid_from and uid_to parameters. It only says the tool works between two vault nodes, which weakly implies the parameters are node UIDs, but it adds no clarity about directionality, UID format, or endpoint inclusion.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns the shortest path between two vault nodes. It also describes the return shape, which makes the tool distinct from neighbors/related queries, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like query_neighbors or find_nodes.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description: use this tool when you need the shortest path between two known nodes. There is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead, so an agent must infer the boundaries.

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