codegraph_build

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

Discloses key behavioral traits (fast, local, no API) and technical approach. However, it does not mention whether the graph is stored, overwritten, or any potential side effects, which is a gap given no annotations are provided.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, technical detail, and usage frequency. No redundant information, and key points are front-loaded.

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?

Covers purpose, method, and usage frequency. Missing where the graph is stored or what output is produced, which would help an agent understand side effects, but the tool is relatively simple.

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 already describes both parameters (path as absolute path, cluster as boolean with default). The description adds no additional context beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it scans a project directory and builds a knowledge graph, specifying the use of tree-sitter AST with regex fallback. This distinguishes it from siblings like codegraph_nodes, codegraph_query, etc., which operate on the built graph.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to run once per project and rebuild when code changes. However, it does not specify when not to use or mention alternative tools.

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