extract_workflow_dependencies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool uses ComfyUI-Manager mappings and server-installed node definitions, and reports installed vs missing packs. This is adequate disclosure for a read-only analysis tool, though it omits potential error conditions.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a technical detail and CLI mirror. Every word adds value, with no filler or tautology.

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 no output schema, the description explains the mapping mechanism and result (installed vs missing). It covers the core functionality but does not mention error handling or that the tool is read-only (though implied by sibling names).

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 100% and the parameter description already clarifies that 'workflow' is a ComfyUI workflow in API format. The description adds that it is JSON format and mentions node class_type mapping, but does not significantly extend meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool analyzes a ComfyUI workflow to determine required custom node packs, mapping node class types to packs and reporting installed vs missing. This specific verb and resource distinguishes it from siblings like 'install_workflow_dependencies' or 'analyze_workflow'.

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 mentions it works remotely (HTTP only) and mirrors a CLI command, providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'install_workflow_dependencies' or 'analyze_workflow', nor does it list exclusions.

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