list_shader_nodes

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

The description does not contradict the readOnlyHint annotation and adds no extra behavioral context beyond the basic function. Since the annotation already covers the read-only nature, the description lacks additional useful detail such as return format or scope.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool, the description is minimally viable but does not clarify the exact scope of nodes returned (e.g., all nodes vs. only shader nodes). The output schema may cover return values, but the description is still thin.

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% for the material_name parameter, and the description does not elaborate on the parameter's meaning or format beyond the name. It fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 action (list) and the resource (shader nodes in a material node tree). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_shader_node or remove_shader_node by specifying the reading operation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states what it does without indicating context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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