check_node_slug

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of disclosure. 'Check whether... available' implies a non-mutating read operation, but the description does not explicitly state that no changes are made, nor does it mention authentication or response behavior.

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 no redundant wording; the purpose and usage context are front-loaded.

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 one-parameter check with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what to check and when to use it. It could mention the exact return value, but 'available' reasonably implies a boolean result.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the schema only says 'slug' is a string. The description provides additional meaning by identifying it as a node slug and explaining the parameter's role in availability checking.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('node slug') and explicitly ties it to the pre-creation workflow ('before creating a node'). This clearly distinguishes it from mutation/read siblings such as create_node or list_nodes.

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 phrase 'before creating a node' gives a clear temporal usage context, telling the agent to call this as a preflight step. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but for a single-purpose check the guidance is sufficient.

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