tigergraph__get_tool_info

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

The description specifies the return content (tool description, use cases, prerequisites, related tools, next steps) but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or free of side effects. With no annotations available, this leaves a minor gap in behavioral transparency.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line summary, a short 'Use this tool when' bullet list, and a short 'Returns' bullet list. It is easily scannable and contains no redundant or irrelevant content.

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?

The description gives sufficient context for an agent to understand what information will be returned and when to call this tool. It does not mention error conditions or invalid tool names, but those are not essential for a simple documentation-lookup tool.

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 fully documents the single 'tool_name' parameter with a description and example, achieving 100% coverage. The overall tool description does not add meaningful extra detail beyond what the schema already conveys, so the baseline score 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 it retrieves detailed information about a specific TigerGraph tool, with a one-line purpose and concrete use-case bullets. It distinguishes this meta-tool from other 'get' tools by focusing on tool metadata rather than graph 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 'Use this tool when' section explicitly lists three scenarios—understanding capabilities, needing examples, and learning prerequisites/related tools—which gives an agent clear guidance on when to invoke this documentation-lookup tool.

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