get_node_report

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

No annotations are present, so the description must bear the full burden. It states the tool generates a report but does not disclose side effects, read-only nature, required permissions, or potential impact on the node. The name 'get' implies read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 short (two sentences plus an Args section) and front-loaded with purpose. The Args section is somewhat redundant with the schema but not vastly wasteful. Overall 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description should at least hint at what the report contains or its structure. It does not, leaving the agent without key context. The tool is simple but the description is too minimal.

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%, and the description only adds 'The node name' for the node parameter, which barely extends the schema's type 'string'. No details on format, valid values, or examples are provided.

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 tool generates a system report for a node and labels it as useful for diagnostics. The verb 'generate' and resource 'system report' are specific, but the description does not explicitly differentiate this tool from other get_node_* diagnostics tools like get_node_status or get_node_config.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'useful for diagnostics' is generic and does not specify when a system report is needed compared to other diagnostics tools listed among siblings.

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