bulk_add_edges

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a write operation ('Add') but doesn't specify permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, error handling for invalid edges, or what happens on success/failure. The mention of 'order/condition' hints at behavioral traits but lacks detail, resulting in significant gaps for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Add multiple edges at once') and adds a clarifying parenthetical. There's no wasted verbiage, though it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 complexity of a bulk write operation with 2 parameters (including a nested array), 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain key aspects like input formats, return values, error conditions, or how it differs from similar tools, leaving the agent poorly equipped to use it correctly.

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 must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'order/condition', which relates to nested properties in the 'edges' array, but doesn't explain the semantics of 'graph_id', 'edges', 'from', 'to', 'properties', or how 'order' and 'condition' function. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's structure.

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 the tool's purpose as 'Add multiple edges at once (with order/condition)', which clearly indicates it performs a bulk write operation on edges. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'add_edge' tool beyond the 'multiple at once' aspect, nor does it specify what type of edges or graph system is involved, making it somewhat vague.

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 versus alternatives like 'add_edge' for single edges or other sibling tools. It mentions 'with order/condition', but this is part of the purpose statement rather than usage advice, leaving the agent without explicit direction on selection criteria.

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