gograph_dependents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. Description adds '100% local, read-only static analysis tool, no side effects, requires no authorization, no rate limits, zero destructive modifications' – extending transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Three labeled sections (BEHAVIOR & SAFETY, USAGE GUIDELINES, COMPLETENESS), short sentences, front-loaded purpose. No redundancy.

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?

Perfectly complete for a single-parameter tool with sufficient annotations. Explains purpose, usage, safety, parameter requirement, and return type without needing an output schema.

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% and description adds practical usage: 'Requires 'package' parameter', 'Returns concrete packages', and gives an example ('internal/graph'), which adds meaning beyond 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?

States 'Find all downstream packages that depend on or import the specified target package' – a specific verb+resource. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'gograph_callers' by noting it's for direct callers.

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: 'before changing a public package interface' and when-not-to-use: 'Do NOT use for direct callers... use gograph_callers instead' with a named alternative.

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