Discover Connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds context about analyzing entity co-occurrence, returning connections not yet in the story graph, and the initialization requirement, which enhances transparency beyond the annotations.

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 with no fluff: first states the action, second provides usage guidance, third states a prerequisite. Front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 the low complexity (1 optional param, good annotations, and existing output schema), the description is complete. It explains purpose, usage, and prerequisite without needing to detail output format.

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?

Only one optional parameter 'k' with schema description coverage 100%. The description does not add new information about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 tool 'surfaces previously unrecorded relationships across the project by analyzing entity co-occurrence', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'add_relationship' for confirming latent links and 'find_relationships' for known connections.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'to find latent links to confirm with add_relationship' and contrasts with 'find_relationships for known connections'. Also provides prerequisite: 'Requires an open project with the relationship engine initialized.'

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