get_node_info

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses endpoint dependency, server-specific results, and the two response formats based on match count. This is comprehensive for a read-only query 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?

Three sentences pack all essential information: purpose, filter usage, and threshold behavior. No redundant or irrelevant details.

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?

Completely describes behavior, filter options, and response format for both cases (≤20 and >20 matches). No output schema but explanation suffices. For a simple read tool, it covers all needed context.

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 description covers node_type well (case-insensitive substring match, omit to list all). Description adds workflow context ('inspect a specific node before composing or modifying'), providing extra guidance 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 explicitly states it queries a ComfyUI server's /object_info endpoint for installed node type definitions, listing specific attributes (inputs, outputs, etc.). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_installed_nodes which list nodes without definitions.

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?

Provides explicit context: use the node_type filter to inspect a specific node before composing or modifying a workflow. Also warns about the threshold where >20 matches returns only summaries. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to siblings, but the guidance is clear.

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