gograph_public

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds behavioral details: freshness checks, analysis mode refreshes, and retry of CHA/SSA for certain modes. This goes beyond annotations without contradiction, improving transparency.

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 moderately sized with clear sections (purpose, freshness details, when/not to use, returns). It is well-structured and front-loaded, though some sentences could be condensed slightly without loss.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema, strong annotations), the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, behavioral nuances, and return summary. It is complete for effective selection and invocation.

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 the description repeats the parameter 'package' implicitly in the purpose. However, it does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the single parameter. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the tool lists exported (public) symbols of a specific package, covering functions, types, interfaces, and variables. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying alternatives for unexported symbols (gograph_node, gograph_focus) and API drift detection (gograph_api), clarifying its unique scope.

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?

The description provides explicit 'WHEN TO USE' (reviewing public contract, building documentation, checking exports) and 'NOT TO USE' conditions with references to specific sibling tools, offering clear decision guidance for the agent.

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