Get Graph Statistics

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds the specific behavioral detail of returning aggregate counts (nodes, edges, entity types), but does not elaborate on return format or error conditions. With annotations covering the safety profile, this modest addition is sufficient.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and directly lists the output contents. No filler or redundant wording.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the return value (statistics) and the required input (graph_id). It could be slightly more explicit about the response structure, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to know when and how to invoke it.

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 documents graph_id with a simple description ('The graph ID') and coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add further semantic detail about the parameter, but the schema already provides the necessary meaning. 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 clearly states the tool's function: retrieving statistics (node counts, edge counts, entity type distribution) from a knowledge graph. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('statistics') and differentiates from sibling tools like get_graph_data or get_entities by focusing on aggregate metrics rather than raw data.

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 implies usage when aggregate statistics are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as get_graph_data or get_entities. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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