start_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool starts a node and that the node must exist. It does not describe whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if the node is already running, any required authentication or permissions, or potential side effects. The existence of an output schema is noted but not leveraged in the description.

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 very short at two sentences, with no unnecessary words. However, its brevity leads to missing critical information, making it less effective. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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 (2 required params, no annotations), the description should provide complete guidance. It fails to explain parameter inputs, resulting in an incomplete tool definition. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for return value explanation, but input semantics remain undocumented.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for missing parameter semantics. However, it does not describe 'lab_path' (e.g., its format or meaning) or 'node_id' (e.g., its domain or how to obtain it). The description adds no value beyond the schema's property names and types.

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 starts a single node and adds a precondition that the node must already exist. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'start_all' (which starts all nodes) and 'add_node' (which creates a node). The verb 'start' and resource 'node' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies that this tool is for starting a specific node that already exists, but it does not explicitly instruct when to use it versus alternatives like 'start_all' or 'stop_node'. It provides a minimal usage context (node must exist) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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