Find nodes

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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring the safety profile, the description adds real value: the return shape (ids, brief summaries, matched fields, sorted by id) and the pagination contract. It discloses filter-AND semantics, which is behavior beyond the annotations and schema. An output schema exists, so the return-shape detail is partially redundant, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and scope, then return shape, then filter/pagination rules. No filler; every sentence carries a distinct fact (scope, output, pagination).

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?

For a filtered-list read tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering return values, the description supplies the remaining essentials: filter combination rule, unfiltered behavior, and pagination chaining. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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, but the description adds inter-parameter semantics the per-field docs don't: filters combine with AND, all are optional, and cursor must be the prior call's nextCursor. That is genuine meaning beyond the 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?

States a specific verb (search or list) and resource (nodes) plus the scope boundary: without fetching the whole graph. Explicitly differentiates from sibling get_node (for details) and implicitly from load_graph/get_graph, so an agent can pick it apart from alternatives without opening schemas.

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?

Gives when-to-use context: all filters optional and AND-combined, no filters lists every node, and names the alternative get_node when details are needed. Pagination behavior (pass nextCursor as cursor) is spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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