update_node

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

Annotations indicate it is not readOnly and not destructive, which is consistent. The description adds that it updates spec and returns a bool, but does not disclose side effects, timing, or error conditions.

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 very concise with a clear one-line purpose followed by parameter list and return type. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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's simplicity (update a node spec), the description covers purpose, parameters, and return. It lacks some context like prerequisites or differentiation but is mostly 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, forcing the description to compensate. It lists the args with brief descriptions and mentions the updatable fields, but does not explain the structure of node_spec (e.g., required keys, constraints).

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 it updates a node's spec and lists the specific fields (availability, name, role, labels). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_node (read) and remove_node (delete).

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 guidelines on when to use this tool versus other node tools or prerequisites like node existence or permissions. The description only states what it does, leaving context vague.

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