get_api_node_schema

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes return contents (inputs/outputs) and source, but does not explicitly state read-only or safe nature. Adequate for a schema retrieval tool, but could be more explicit about lack of side effects.

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 with clear front-loading: first sentence states core purpose, second adds details and prerequisite. No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, description adequately covers what it does, what it lists, and the necessary prerequisite. Could mention the output format (JSON object_info), but not strictly required given typical API conventions.

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 covers 100% of parameters with description. Description adds value by providing example (FluxProImageNode) and prerequisite context, going beyond schema's basic type definition.

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 returns input schema for a specific API/partner node, listing visible inputs, hidden inputs, and outputs. It distinguishes from sibling list_api_nodes by specifying the action of retrieving schema after finding the class_type.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use list_api_nodes first to find class_type, providing clear prerequisite. No when-not-to-use stated, but the single guideline is sufficient for this simple tool.

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