node_inspect

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it shows role, availability, status, and manager reachability, and the expected return format. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it could mention potential errors or edge cases.

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 two sentences plus a brief args/returns note. Every sentence adds value: purpose, constraints, sibling alternatives, and parameter explanation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficient.

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?

With one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, constraints, parameter semantics, and return value. For this low-complexity tool, it is fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the parameter: 'id_or_name - The node id or hostname (as shown by node_list).' This adds meaning by specifying the source of valid values and that both id and hostname are acceptable.

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 a swarm node's full inspect payload by id or name.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('swarm node's full inspect payload'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like node_list, node_remove, etc., by focusing on inspecting a single node.

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 explicitly states 'Must run against a swarm manager,' provides a prerequisite ('use node_list to enumerate nodes first'), and mentions alternatives (the docker://nodes resource for a fleet summary, service_ps to see services on a node). This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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