Finds a graph's maximum independent set for up to 20 vertices using exact bitmask enumeration, helping solve selection problems where no two chosen vertices are adjacent.
Find the maximum independent set of a graph using exact bitmask enumeration (up to 20 vertices).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| edges | Yes | Edges as [u, v] pairs | |
| vertex_count | Yes | Number of vertices (max 20) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral context. It discloses the exact enumeration method and the 20-vertex limit, which are useful traits, but it does not describe the return value or assumptions about the graph (e.g., undirected edges, isolated vertices).
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that includes the core action, algorithm, and limit without any wasted words.
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?
This is a simple two-parameter computational tool with full schema coverage, but there is no output schema. The description does not state what the tool returns (e.g., a list of vertices or the set size), leaving a meaningful gap for an agent.
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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds only the 20-vertex bound, which is also present in the vertex_count schema description, so it does not meaningfully extend parameter semantics.
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: 'Find the maximum independent set of a graph.' It also names the algorithm and a hard limit. However, it does not distinguish this tool from related graph-algorithm siblings such as min_vertex_cover, which is the complementary problem.
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?
The parenthetical '(up to 20 vertices)' gives an implied usage constraint: use this only for small graphs. There is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives such as min_vertex_cover or other graph routines.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.