add_triple

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint: false. The description adds value by disclosing that entities are auto-created if they don't exist—a key behavioral trait not covered by annotations. It does not mention failure cases or permissions, but the auto-creation detail is useful.

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 brief and front-loaded: the main purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by a concise note on auto-creation and a clearly structured parameter list. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 string params, no enums, output schema exists), the description covers essential aspects: what it does, parameter meanings, and return type. It does not elaborate on constraints (e.g., allowed predicates) but is sufficient for a basic create operation.

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?

Input schema has 3 required string parameters with no descriptions (coverage 0%). Description compensates by explaining each parameter: 'subject: The subject entity name.', 'predicate: The relationship predicate.', 'object_name: The object entity name.' This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Add a knowledge graph triple (subject -> predicate -> object).' It uses a specific verb 'Add' and a clear resource 'knowledge graph triple.' Among siblings like 'delete_triple' and 'query_triples', this tool is uniquely identified as creation, distinguishing it well.

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 adding a triple, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools. It lacks context like prerequisites (e.g., requiring a space) or cases where existing triples might conflict.

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