Describe Resource

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. Description adds value by explaining the return type ('All properties and values') and depth behavior, but does not disclose authorization or rate limits.

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?

Highly concise and well-structured: brief intro, clear args/returns sections, bulleted usage guidance. No unnecessary sentences; every sentence adds value.

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 2 parameters, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, return info, and usage guidance. It adequately addresses the tool's scope and context among 40+ siblings.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description repeats the parameter info from the schema in 'Args' without adding new meaning beyond default value for depth.

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?

Description states 'Get all triples for a resource (Concise Bounded Description)', providing a specific verb and resource type. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like inspect_concept and query_sparql in the 'When to use' section.

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?

Explicitly includes a 'When to use this vs X' section with two alternatives, stating conditions for each. Also adds a 'Use when' line, providing clear context for tool selection.

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