Find Relationships

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds context about the scope (cross-references and discovered connections for a specific entity) and the prerequisite of the relationship engine being initialized, which goes beyond annotations. It does not contradict 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?

The description is two sentences: first sentence defines purpose and output, second sentence provides usage alternatives and prerequisite. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy, 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?

Given the 3 parameters with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is adequate. It explains purpose, differentiation, and prerequisites. Output format is not described but no output schema exists. For a query tool, this is sufficient.

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% with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description does not add additional semantic meaning, such as defaults or examples, beyond what is in the schema. Baseline for high coverage is 3.

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 queries the story graph for entities related to a given entity, specifying the verb 'query' and the resource 'story graph'. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming 'character_network' (whole-cast graph) and 'discover_connections' (project-wide co-occurring entities).

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'This covers cross-references and discovered connections for a specific entity; use character_network for the whole-cast graph, or discover_connections to surface co-occurring entities project-wide.' It also mentions a 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.