xgmem

create_entities

Add multiple entities to a project knowledge graph by specifying names, types, and observations.

Instructions

Create multiple new entities in the project knowledge graph

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "entities": "<entities>"
    },
    "name": "create_entities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	The project identifier
`entities`	Yes	An array of entities to create

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.1May 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Create multiple new entities'. It fails to disclose behavioral traits like idempotency, error handling, duplicate handling, or any constraints on entity names/types.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action. It could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity, but it is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of creating multiple entities with nested arrays, the description lacks important context such as return value, batching limits, or error behavior. No output schema exists, so the description should have provided more detail.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting a baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states 'Create multiple new entities in the project knowledge graph', clearly identifying the verb (create), resource (entities), and scope (project knowledge graph). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_relations or delete_entities.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 alternatives such as create_relations or add_graph_observations. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., project existence) or conditions under which this tool is appropriate.

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

Deploy Server