gograph_node

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds further context: local, no side effects, no authorization/credentials needed, no rate limits. This goes beyond annotations with concrete safety assurances.

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 and well-structured with labeled sections (BEHAVIOR & SAFETY, USAGE GUIDELINES, COMPLETENESS). Every sentence adds unique value, no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description mentions returns are complete node properties. It covers purpose, behavior, usage, parameter requirement, and example. For a simple one-parameter tool, this is thorough.

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% for a single parameter with a good description. The description adds value by stating the parameter is required, noting return completeness, and providing an example ('Graph'). This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 states the specific verb 'Extract' and resource 'full AST property details for any specific symbol, package, or file node'. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings by specifying deep structural metadata vs raw source code.

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 guidance: 'Call this tool when you need deep structural metadata... Do NOT use if you need raw source code only (use gograph_source instead)'. Clearly states when to use and directs to alternative.

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