get_decayed_graph

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions 'decayed based on time' without disclosing whether the tool is read-only, side effects, performance implications, or output format. Critical behavioral aspects like authentication needs or data transformation are omitted.

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 very concise (one short sentence), but it sacrifices necessary details for brevity. It is not verbose, but it is under-specified, lacking context that could be added without making it overly long.

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 the absence of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, how decay works, or how it differs from similar tools like 'get_graph_at_time'. The tool's complexity (two optional parameters, no required fields) demands more context.

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% and parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 gets the knowledge graph with confidence values decayed based on time. The verb 'Get', resource 'knowledge graph', and specific aspect 'decayed based on time' provide a specific and unique purpose, distinguishing it from siblings like 'read_graph' or 'get_graph_at_time'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no exclusions, and no context on prerequisites or preferred scenarios. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage without comparison to sibling tools.

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