Graph Pack

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It mentions 'semantic search and neighborhood expansion', which implies a read operation, but does not state whether it is destructive, requires authorization, or has side effects. Minimal behavioral context is given.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it may be too minimal given the tool's complexity, but for conciseness alone it scores well.

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, no output schema, and 31 sibling tools (5 similar graph tools), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the output format, parameter semantics, or how it differs from related tools. The tool is under-documented for its complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. However, the description does not mention any of the four parameters (query, flowId, maxMatches, maxNeighbors) or their roles. Parameter names provide partial clues, but the description adds no semantic meaning.

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 'Return a compact context pack with semantic search and neighborhood expansion' clearly indicates the tool's action (return) and resource (context pack) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like node-red-graph-query (pure query) or node-red-graph-analyze (analysis). However, it lacks explanation of what a 'context pack' is, which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its many sibling tools, such as node-red-graph-query or node-red-graph-summary. The description implies general usage (semantic search and neighborhood expansion) but does not specify conditions or exclusions.

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