create_node

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) already indicate mutation without destruction. The description adds value by explicitly stating 'MUTATING: This modifies the flow' and explaining the dryRun parameter for safe validation. No contradictions 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?

Two sentences convey the core purpose, mutation warning, and validation guidance. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. The most critical information is 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?

Given 10 parameters (100% schema coverage), no output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (mutation, dryRun). It could mention the expected return value (e.g., created node object) but is still adequate for correct invocation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining node types (Say, Question, If, Code) and directing users to get_node_descriptors for the complete list, which goes beyond the schema's static enum placeholder for type.

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 verb 'Creates' and the resource 'a new node in a Cognigy.AI flow'. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like update_node, delete_node, move_node, and provides context that nodes are building blocks of conversation logic.

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 advises using dryRun=true for validation before actual creation, and references get_node_descriptors (via schema) to list available node types. It explicitly labels the tool as 'MUTATING', warning of side effects. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or provide alternatives.

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