retrieve_graph_neighborhood

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

No annotations are provided. The description claims 'complete' but the schema includes limit/offset for pagination, contradicting completeness. It also omits important traits like that include_observations is entity-only and that results may be truncated. Not transparent about pagination or performance.

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 clear sentence, efficient and front-loaded. However, it could be structured better (e.g., bullet points for components) to improve readability, but it's not verbose.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, yet the description is very brief. It does not explain the output structure, pagination details (limit/offset), or the distinction between entity and source nodes. For a complex graph retrieval, more detail is needed to be complete.

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. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only lists components covered by parameters like include_relationships, include_sources, etc. No extra context on parameter values or behavior.

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 action ('retrieve complete graph neighborhood') and the resource ('around a node'), listing the included components (entities, relationships, sources, events). This distinguishes it from siblings like retrieve_entities or list_relationships that retrieve only specific types.

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 description implies usage when a complete neighborhood is needed but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_relationships or retrieve_related_entities. No when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned.

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