graph_context

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

The description declares the tool is 'Read-only' and explains it is budgeted to a character limit, which are important behavioral traits. No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It could additionally mention error handling or behavior if limits are exceeded, but overall is clear.

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?

Two sentences: first states the core action and output; second provides usage guidance. No extraneous words, information is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description could have explained the return format or error behavior more explicitly. It mentions 'prompt-ready context pack' but is vague. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions, which are sufficient.

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 builds a prompt-ready context pack centered on an entity, with specific components (entity, neighbors, memories) and a character limit. It distinguishes from sibling tools by contrasting with `pack` and `graph_neighbors`.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('when an agent needs ready-to-inject context about one specific entity') and when to use alternatives (`pack` for query-driven, `graph_neighbors` for raw edges).

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