search_nodes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the description's job is to add context beyond that. It adds little beyond restating the read-only search behavior, though for a simple search tool there is limited behavior to disclose. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single sentence with zero wasted words, and the core action is front-loaded. It is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than true concision.

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 search tool with no output schema and a sibling (inspect_node_type) that overlaps in domain, the description should clarify scope and the meaning of the limit parameter. It does neither, leaving an agent to guess about result behavior and when this tool is the right choice.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for explaining the parameters. The description implies 'query' is a search term for node types, but it does not clarify the 'limit' parameter's semantics (pagination, result cap, or default behavior) at all. With two parameters undocumented, the description is insufficient.

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 states a specific verb ('search') and a specific resource ('node types installed in ComfyUI'), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from its siblings (especially inspect_node_type), but the verb choice implies a broad search versus targeted inspection, giving partial differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings, no exclusions, and no named alternatives. An agent cannot tell from the description whether to use search_nodes or inspect_node_type for a given task, leaving the routing decision entirely to inference.

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