sd_create_node

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

Annotations provide no behavioral hints (all false). The description adds some transparency by stating the node is 'verified' and 'atomic' and that it is created without auto-connecting. However, it does not explain what 'verified' means, whether creation can fail, or any side effects (e.g., overwriting existing nodes).

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, well-formed sentence that conveys the core purpose and constraints without any redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise.

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 that there is an output schema (not shown) and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is somewhat incomplete. It lacks details on preconditions (e.g., does the graph need to exist?), what 'verified' means, and error scenarios. However, the tool is simple with only three parameters, so the description partially suffices.

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 for its properties, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'position' is explicit, and 'definition_id' is implied as the type of node, but it does not elaborate on the meaning of 'graph' or what values 'definition_id' can take. The parameter names are self-explanatory, adding only minor clarity.

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 specifies the action (create), the object (verified atomic node), and two key constraints: explicit position and no auto-connection. This effectively distinguishes it from siblings like sd_connect_nodes (which connects) and sd_create_instance_node (which may create instance nodes differently).

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 such as sd_create_instance_node or sd_connect_nodes. It only implicitly hints that auto-connection is not performed, but does not state when one might want that behavior or what tools to use instead.

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