get_td_nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that output is 'token-optimized' and that detailLevel+limit are supported, but does not clarify whether the operation is read-only, how errors are handled, or what happens if the path is invalid. The behavioral disclosure is minimal for a tool that likely has no side effects but still needs confirmation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and key options without any redundancy. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 six parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the 'pattern' filter, the 'responseFormat' option, or the 'includeProperties' flag, nor does it describe the shape of the returned list. An agent would need to rely heavily on the schema and may still lack context on how the tool behaves in practice.

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 descriptions for all six parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description only mentions detailLevel and limit, adding little beyond schema. It does not explain the interplay between pattern, responseFormat, or includeProperties, which could be crucial for correct usage.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('nodes under a path'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_td_node_parameters or get_td_node_errors that operate on specific nodes. The mention of 'token-optimized output' adds a unique selling point without ambiguity.

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 implies the tool is for listing nodes under a path, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or provide guidance on choosing between this and other node-related tools (e.g., get_td_node_parameters for detailed properties).

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