gid_refactor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Preview or apply graph changes' but does not mention that modifications are destructive, require permissions, or have side effects. The dryRun parameter suggests a safety mechanism, but the description does not elaborate on behavior or error conditions.

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 a single sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it includes operations ('split', 'merge') that are not in the schema, slightly undercutting efficiency. Overall, it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks important context. It fails to explain what the preview output looks like, how changes are applied, error handling, or return values. Given the tool's complexity (preview vs apply, multiple operations), the description is insufficient.

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%, meaning every parameter already has a description in the schema. The tool's top-level description adds no additional parameter-specific information. A score of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the burden adequately.

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 specifies the tool is for previewing or applying graph changes (rename, move, split, merge nodes). However, 'split' and 'merge' are not present in the input schema's operation enum, which actually includes 'preview', 'rename', 'move', and 'delete'. This mismatch reduces clarity and could mislead an AI agent.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gid_edit_graph' or sibling tools. No context about prerequisites, when to prefer preview vs apply, or what distinguishes it from similar tools is given.

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