get_node_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden. It usefully discloses that the backend is live ComfyUI when COMFYUI_HOST is set and the knowledge base otherwise, but it omits what 'full node information' contains, error behavior for unknown class names, and freshness implications of the knowledge base fallback.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words, and the core action is front-loaded before the backend-selection detail.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify what fields 'full node information' returns, and it does not. It is adequate for a simple single-param read tool but leaves the return shape and sibling boundaries ambiguous.

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 single parameter has 100% schema coverage, including an example ('e.g. KSampler, CheckpointLoaderSimple'), so the schema already does the work. The description's 'by its class name' slightly reinforces naming but adds nothing 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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieves full node info for a ComfyUI node, keyed by class name. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_node_inputs, get_node_outputs, or list_node_types, which an agent must infer.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over get_node_inputs, get_node_outputs, list_node_types, or discover_nodes_live. The COMFYUI_HOST note describes data sourcing, not when the tool should be used.

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