gograph_concurrency

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent; description adds detail about freshness checks, mode-specific retry behavior, and confirms no side effects. No contradiction.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (purpose, freshness notes, filter, when to use/not use, returns). No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a single-optional-parameter tool with comprehensive annotations, the description fully covers behavior, return format, and edge cases (empty result). No gaps.

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?

Only one optional parameter (term) with 100% schema coverage. Description adds practical examples like 'mutex', 'goroutine', 'channel', which enhances utility beyond the schema description.

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 defines the tool's purpose: finding concurrency primitives (goroutines, channels, sync primitives) and distinguishes from siblings by explicitly stating when not to use it (sequential flow, refer to gograph_callers/gograph_callees).

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?

Provides explicit WHEN TO USE (auditing race safety, understanding async flow) and NOT TO USE (sequential call flow) with named alternatives.

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