gograph_path

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

Description states read-only, no side effects, and prerequisite (requires graph.json, run gograph build first), adding beyond annotations. No contradiction with 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?

Concise, well-structured with core purpose first, then prerequisite, then usage notes, then return format. 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?

Completeness for a simple tool: covers prerequisite, usage, return format (compensating for missing output schema), and behavioral traits. 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?

Schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description does not add meaning beyond schema; BFS and return format are not parameter-specific.

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 tool finds the shortest call chain between two symbols using BFS. It distinguishes from siblings via WHEN TO USE and NOT TO USE sections.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE (confirming reachability, debugging chains, tracing flow) and NOT TO USE (direct callers use gograph_callers, transitive upstream use gograph_impact) provide clear guidance and alternatives.

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