scan_text_nodes

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

The description states the tool returns text node data with character, fontSize, and fontName, which is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds context about scoping and default behavior (current page). No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single, concise sentence that clearly conveys the tool's purpose, scope, and default behavior without unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, scoping, and returned properties. Given the simple nature (read-only, one optional param, no output schema), it is mostly complete. It could be enhanced by briefly describing the output format (e.g., array of objects), but is adequate.

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 schema provides full coverage for the single 'root' parameter with a description that matches the tool's description. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond the schema's own description, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 tool returns every TEXT node within a subtree with specific properties (characters, fontSize, fontName). It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('TEXT node within a subtree'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle different node types or perform searches.

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 explains how to scope the scan (with a root node id or default to current page), but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'search_nodes' or 'scan_nodes_by_types'. The context is clear but lacks exclusions or comparative recommendations.

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