get_queue

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is read-only, requires a reachable ComfyUI server (local or remote), and returns JSON with running and pending arrays. This provides complete transparency without contradictions.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose and return structure, and the second provides usage guidance and alternatives. No extraneous information, and key details are front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, read-only nature, server requirement, return format, and relationship to other tools. It is complete and sufficiently detailed for an agent to correctly select and invoke 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 zero parameters, so there is nothing to add beyond the schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4; the description does not need to explain parameters. It does add value by describing the output structure, but that's not directly parameter semantics.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'current ComfyUI execution queue', detailing what it returns (running and pending jobs with prompt_id and position). It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing related tools like cancel_job, cancel_queued_job, clear_queue, get_job_status, and get_history.

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 guidance on when to use this tool: to see what is in flight before cancel_job or cancel_queued_job/clear_queue. It also explicitly mentions alternative tools for specific prompt outcomes (get_job_status, get_history), covering both when and when not to use it.

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