graphify_neighbors

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'with relations'. Does not disclose behavior for missing nodes, format of output, or any side effects. Schema coverage is 0%, so description bears more burden but fails to provide sufficient detail.

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?

Single concise sentence with no wasted words. However, the brevity leaves significant gaps in clarity. It is appropriately front-loaded but would benefit from more detail.

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?

Despite having an output schema (unknown content), the description lacks context for parameters and does not specify what 'relations' means or how results are structured. The tool is simple, but with 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate more.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain what 'node' should be (e.g., ID, name) or what 'as_json' does. The agent receives no guidance on parameter values beyond the schema types.

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 it lists direct (1-hop) neighbors with relations, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'graphify_node_details' or 'graphify_path' by specifying 'neighbors', but lacks explicit comparison.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. Does not mention any context where it is appropriate or inappropriate, nor reference sibling tools for different needs.

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