Query Hydra DB

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds that tool returns chunks with graph-enriched context and supports fast/thinking modes. Beyond annotations, it does not disclose additional behaviors like rate limits or authentication needs.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with main action, and no wasted words. Could be slightly more structured, but overall efficient and easy to parse.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and existing annotations, description adequately explains return format (chunks with entity paths and knowledge graph relations) and usage scenarios. It compensates for missing output schema by describing enriched context.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and describes all parameters with enums, ranges, defaults. Description adds minimal new meaning beyond restating modes and graph context. 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?

Description clearly states the tool searches through Hydra DB agentic memories and returns chunks with graph-enriched context. Verb 'Search' and resource 'Hydra DB memories' are specific. No explicit distinction from sibling 'hydra_db_search', but the focus on graph context differentiates it.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use: to find previously stored information, past conversations, user preferences, or ingested knowledge. It provides clear context but does not mention when not to use or compare with alternatives like hydra_db_search or hydradb_list.

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