configure_manager

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: HTTP API actions take effect live, config.ini actions require restart. It also notes that set_network_mode and set_security_level have no HTTP setter. This exceeds minimal expectations for a configuration tool.

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 succinctly convey the purpose, two execution modes, and behavioral differences. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 lack of output schema and moderate parameter count, the description is complete. It covers all actions, their mechanisms, and the key difference in apply timing. No gaps for an AI to misuse the tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions, but the description adds significant value by listing allowed values per action and explaining the live vs restart behavior. This enriches the agent's understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 it configures ComfyUI-Manager settings, mirroring comfy-cli manager subcommands. It distinguishes between HTTP API actions and config.ini actions, providing a specific verb and resource. The tool is distinct from sibling tools which focus on workflow, model, and image operations.

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 provides clear usage context: HTTP API actions work against remote ComfyUI, while config.ini actions require a known local ComfyUI path and a restart. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternative tools, though the guidance on action types is sufficient for the AI to decide.

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