tigergraph__upsert_vectors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It mentions the upsert operation and inline vector requirement, but does not explicitly disclose side effects such as creating/overwriting vertices or whether existing attributes are replaced.

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, using two clear sentences with no unnecessary information. The alternative-file guidance is included 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?

The description provides the essential operational context: inline vector data, the REST API mechanism, and the alternative for file-based bulk loads. It does not cover edge cases or return behavior, but is sufficient for the tool's straightforward purpose.

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 schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, including nested fields. The description adds little beyond the schema, so a baseline score 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 operation: upserting multiple vertices with vector data using the REST Upsert API. It also distinguishes this tool from the file-based loading alternatives in the sibling list.

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?

It explicitly states that vectors must be provided inline as lists of floats and directs users to load_vectors_from_csv or load_vectors_from_json for bulk-loading from a local file, providing clear usage context versus alternatives.

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