Save graph

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses a real side effect (the saved path becomes the current file) and the format-inference rule, but says nothing about overwriting existing files, permission requirements, or failure behavior for an unspecified path.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with the conditional path behavior following immediately. Every clause carries information.

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 zero-required-parameter tool with an output schema (so return values need no explanation), the description covers the main behavioral question. It leaves overwrite/error semantics unstated, which is a minor but real gap.

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%, so baseline is 3, and the description adds meaning the schema lacks: the format is inferred from the file extension (.json → JSON, otherwise YAML). It does not clarify directory creation or relative-path resolution.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Save the current graph') and immediately qualifies the scope of the save. It contrasts functionally with load_graph in the sibling set, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

It clearly explains the two operating modes: with a path it saves a copy there; without one it saves the current graph. This is conditional usage guidance, but it gives no guidance on when to prefer saving a copy versus saving in place, and names no alternatives.

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