list_nodes

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool lists nodes with 1-based indices but does not disclose whether it is read-only, what happens on invalid indices, or if it returns all nodes. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 sentence with no redundancy. Efficient but could be expanded slightly to include parameter context without losing conciseness.

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 tool is a simple list operation with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks parameter details and usage context, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 0% and description adds 'using 1-based node indices' which implies track_index and item_index are related to node indices. However, it does not explain the meaning of 'layer', 'track_index', or 'item_index' specifically, leaving ambiguity despite the hint.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'nodes', and the context 'clip color graph using 1-based node indices'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'inspect_node_tree' or 'set_node_enabled' that have different purposes.

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 vs alternatives. No prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate.

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