start_comfyui

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses a 60-second wait timeout and the precondition. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., if ComfyUI is already running) or any authentication requirements.

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 long, each with a clear purpose. It is front-loaded with the key action and preconditions, and omits unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (starting a service), the description covers the main action, precondition, supported environments, and timeout. It does not describe the return value, but for a start command this is somewhat acceptable. It could mention potential failure modes.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the usage context, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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 'start' and the resource 'ComfyUI', and indicates it uses process info from a previous stop_comfyui call. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like restart_comfyui and install_comfyui.

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 explicitly ties usage to a previous stop_comfyui call and mentions support for both Desktop and Python installs. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear. Alternatives like restart_comfyui are implied.

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