get_call_graph

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

No annotations provided. The description is straightforward and transparent about returning a call graph with Mermaid diagram and details. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, permissions needed, or limitations beyond parameters.

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?

Very concise; uses a clear Args/Returns structure. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded with the purpose.

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 4 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. Could be improved by noting any dependencies (e.g., project must be scanned). Overall adequate.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning to parameters: explains direction options and the return format. Provides more context than the raw 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a function call graph, with a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_dependency_graph or get_class_hierarchy.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or comparison with similar tools.

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