compositor.add_node

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., modifying the node tree), validation of the 'type' parameter, or what happens if the node tree is not active. The description is too minimal to inform the agent about potential consequences.

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 short sentence, but it omits essential information. While concise, it fails to earn its place by adding value beyond the tool's name. Important details about usage and parameters are missing.

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 absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, prerequisites, or how the node is integrated into the compositor tree. For a mutation tool, this is inadequate.

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%, meaning the description must compensate. However, it provides no additional meaning beyond the schema titles. The 'name' and 'type' parameters are not explained (e.g., naming conventions, valid node types), leaving the agent without useful guidance.

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 ('Add') and the resource ('a node to the scene compositor node tree'). It uses specific terminology that distinguishes it from related tools like compositor.link or geometry_nodes.add_node.

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 implies the tool is for compositing nodes, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like shading.add_node or geometry_nodes.add_node. No when-not or prerequisite information is given.

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