Graphiti Local

get_entity_edge

Fetch a single fact edge by UUID from an allow-listed graph to inspect a known relationship without scanning the entire graph.

Instructions

Get one fact edge by UUID from an allow-listed graph.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "uuid": "<uuid>"
    },
    "name": "get_entity_edge"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`uuid`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add one genuine behavioral constraint — reads are scoped to an 'allow-listed graph' — but says nothing about behavior for unknown/unauthorized UUIDs or error semantics. The output schema already covers the return shape.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single tight sentence with the resource and the keying mechanism front-loaded. No filler, nothing redundant with the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter read lookup with an output schema defined, the description supplies what the agent needs: the resource, the identifier, and the access scope ('allow-listed graph'). Remaining details live in the schema rather than the prose.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single uuid parameter, but the name plus the description's 'by UUID' phrasing makes clear it is the edge identifier. No format requirements or provenance guidance (where the UUID comes from) are given, which is the remaining gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieve a single fact edge, keyed by UUID. 'Fact edge' is precise terminology that separates it from the episode- and node-oriented siblings, though it does not name an alternative tool explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: 'by UUID' signals this is a direct lookup that requires an identifier obtained elsewhere (e.g., from search_memory_facts or search_nodes). There is no explicit when-to-use statement or named alternative.

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

Deploy Server