visualize_graph

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose the primary behavior: generating Mermaid.js and ASCII relational network diagrams. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what depth means, or how missing nodes are handled.

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 compact and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. The 'for power users' phrase adds marginal value, but overall the text is scannable and free of redundant schema repetition.

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 three parameters with zero schema-level descriptions and no annotations, the description is too thin for an agent to assemble a correct call. The output schema may cover return structure, but input semantics and usage context are 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 0%, so the description needed to explain node, depth, and project. It mentions none of them, leaving the required 'node' parameter ambiguous and the 'depth' semantics entirely unexplained.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb and resource: it generates Knowledge Graph topology diagrams. It also names concrete output formats (Mermaid.js and ASCII), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_graph or save_graph_relation.

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 query_graph or other graph-related siblings. The word 'Visualizer' implies use for diagramming, but there are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions.

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