map_network

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 explains the internal behavior: 'queries the module index, groups by category, returns a structured map with counts.' It also notes that no parameters are needed and that it returns the full overview, fully disclosing the tool's operation.

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 concise with four sentences: purpose, content, usage, and behavior/parameter note. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (categories, counts, top modules, total stats) and how it works (queries index, groups by category). This is complete for its complexity level.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, and the description explicitly confirms 'No parameters needed.' With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no extra meaning but is consistent. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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's action: 'Browse the entire Celiums knowledge network organized by category.' It specifies the output content (categories, module counts, top modules, total statistics) and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on network overview rather than individual records or actions.

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 usage guidance is provided: 'Use to explore what knowledge is available, discover categories, or get an overview of the knowledge base.' While no explicit when-not or alternatives are given, the sibling tools have clearly different purposes, making this sufficient.

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