tigergraph__install_query

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

No annotations were provided, so the description bears the full burden for behavioral transparency. It clearly indicates this is an install/compile action, but it does not mention side effects (e.g., whether an existing query is overwritten), return value, or failure modes such as graph-not-found or compilation errors.

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 well-structured with clear headings (Use When, Quick Start, Common Workflow, Tips, Related Tools) and each section adds relevant information without excessive verbosity. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but remains focused and scannable.

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 provides strong contextual guidance through use cases, a workflow example, and related-tool references. It lacks explicit information about the return value or output format after installation, but the core decision-making context for when and how to use the tool is well covered.

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 already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including defaults for profile and graph_name. The description adds a useful tip that query_text should start with 'CREATE QUERY', but it does not go substantially beyond the schema for parameter meaning.

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 opens with a clear, specific action: 'Install a GSQL query on a TigerGraph graph, compiling it for faster repeated execution.' This distinguishes installation from simply running or dropping a query and states the purpose (compiling for faster repeated execution) directly.

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 When' section explicitly lists appropriate scenarios (run multiple times, performance, reusable logic, building query libraries), and the 'Common Workflow' section provides step-by-step context linking to run_query, run_installed_query, and show_query. This gives the agent clear guidance on when to select this tool over siblings.

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