graph_connect

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

Discloses the upsert behavior (inserts or replaces) which is important for understanding side effects. With no annotations, this is valuable. Lacks details on return value or error conditions, but overall adequate.

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?

Four concise sentences without waste. Each sentence adds value: purpose, relation types, side effects, usage guidance. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Covers purpose, side effects, and usage alternatives. Lacks return value details and error handling, but for a simple create tool, it is mostly complete given no output schema.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description only mentions there are 7 relation types without adding new semantics beyond the schema, so it does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 clearly states the tool creates a directed edge between two memories in the knowledge graph, with 7 relation types. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing memory_related for discovery and graph_explore for traversal.

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 advises when to use alternative tools: memory_related to discover connections and graph_explore to traverse. Also notes the side effect (upsert), guiding appropriate usage.

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