gograph_fixtures

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

Discloses read-only nature and a prerequisite (requires .gograph/graph.json from 'gograph build .'), which adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations that already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent.

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 concise, well-structured with clear sections, and front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence serves a purpose without 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?

Covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, prerequisite, read-only behavior, typical usage scenario and exclusions, and return value description. Adequate for a tool with one parameter and no 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 description coverage is 100%, providing adequate meaning for the single parameter. The description reinforces the parameter's role but does not add new semantics beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('test helper structs and factory/builder functions declared in *_test.go files') with clear scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning gograph_tests and filesystem search.

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?

Explicitly provides 'WHEN TO USE' (before writing new tests to avoid duplication) and 'NOT TO USE' (instead use gograph_tests for test functions, filesystem search for external data), giving clear context and alternatives.

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