get_statetree_node

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses returned data (class, properties, instance data, tree location) but does not mention side effects, authorization, rate limits, or error conditions. Adequately describes a read-only operation but lacks depth on behavioral traits.

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?

Three sentences plus an Args list. Purpose stated first, followed by return summary, then parameter details. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value efficiently.

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?

With an existing output schema, description doesn't need to detail return format. Explains what is returned and where the node lives. Lacks handling of invalid GUID or errors, but for a read-only retrieval tool with 2 params, it covers essential context. Could mention that node_guid must come from other tools.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. Adds clear explanations for both parameters: asset_path as 'Content path to the StateTree asset' and node_guid as 'GUID of the node (from get_statetree_state or get_statetree_evaluators)'. This provides essential context missing from schema.

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?

Description clearly states it gets detailed info for a single node (task/evaluator/condition) by GUID. Verb 'Get' and specific resource 'node' with types are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_statetree_state (state info) or get_statetree_evaluators (list).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention when not to use it or contrast with related tools like get_statetree_state for state-level info. Implies need for a node GUID, but no decision context.

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