get_embeddings

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

The description explicitly states the operation is 'Read-only', explains the data source (API endpoint and folder), and provides usage guidance for prompts. With no annotations, this fully discloses behavior.

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 three sentences, each adding value: purpose, requirement, return usage. No redundant information, front-loaded with the main action.

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 simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, output format, and safety, making it fully complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so baseline 4 applies. The description implicitly confirms no parameters, which is accurate and sufficient.

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 'List' and the resource 'textual-inversion embeddings installed on the connected ComfyUI server', distinguishing it from any sibling tools. It also provides additional context about the endpoint and folder.

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 specifies a prerequisite (running, reachable ComfyUI) and notes that it takes no parameters. While it does not explicitly list alternatives, no sibling tool directly competes, so the guidance is adequate.

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