KG Backfill Memory Links

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: batch processing and pagination. It clarifies that the tool modifies the knowledge graph by creating triples, which is beyond what annotations provide.

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, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second adds batch processing, third gives pagination hint. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

While output schema may cover return values, the description omits details on nest/branch scoping and edge cases (e.g., no matching entities). It adequately covers purpose, batching, and pagination but lacks completeness for a batch mutation 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It only explains limit and offset for pagination, but fails to describe nest, branch, or response_format. This leaves significant gaps for a 5-parameter tool.

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 verb+resource: 'Retroactively scan existing memories and create KG triples linking them to matching entities.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kg_add_triple or kg_query, as it explicitly focuses on backfilling from existing memories.

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 implies use for batch backfilling with pagination ('Processes memories in batches. Use limit/offset for pagination.'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative KG tools or provide when-not guidance.

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