document_get_node

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

The description correctly implies a read operation, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose potential side effects, error behavior (e.g., missing path), or performance implications. Adequate but not thorough.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with examples. No unnecessary words; every part contributes to understanding.

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?

For a simple getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention that paths follow OpenAPI conventions, but examples already convey this. Slightly incomplete due to missing usage context.

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%, and the description adds value by showing the exact format for nodePath with examples, reducing ambiguity about parameter syntax beyond the schema.

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 'Get any node by its node path' and provides concrete examples (e.g., /paths[/pets]/get), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also implicitly distinguishes from sibling getters by being the generic version.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus specific getters like document_get_operation or document_get_schema. Given the large number of sibling tools, this omission could confuse an AI agent about which tool to select.

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