get_node_properties

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint:true, consistent with 'Read'. The description adds the return format structure and error behavior, which goes beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 extremely concise with four sentences, each providing essential information. It front-loads the purpose and packs in behavior, input nuance, and return format without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers the return shape, error handling, and parameter details. It could mention potential errors or scenarios, but it is sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'always-array' behavior for the nodes parameter and the semantics of 'changedOnly:true', which clarifies the parameter usage 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 explicitly states 'Read one or more nodes' current property values', providing a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_node_properties' and 'get_node_signals' through its specific focus on property values and its 'always-array' behavior.

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 offers usage tips such as passing a single-element array for one-off reads and using 'changedOnly:true'. However, it does not compare with siblings like 'get_node_signals' or 'get_scene_tree', nor does it specify when not to use this tool.

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