comfy_send_to_disk

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

Annotations already signal idempotent and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful details: writes are atomic and a sidecar manifest is created. It does not elaborate on manifest naming or overwrite behavior, but with annotations covering safety, this is adequate and contains no contradiction.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence purpose followed by a compact Args list. Every line earns its place and there is no filler or repetition of schema details beyond useful parameter semantics.

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 a simple tool with an output schema available, the description covers all parameters, the core behavior, and key traits like atomicity and the sidecar manifest. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 0% description coverage, but the Args section fully compensates by documenting all four parameters. It adds semantics such as filename being the image filename in ComfyUI outputs, subfolder as optional subfolder, output_dir defaulting to COMFY_OUTPUT_DIR, and prompt_id enriching the manifest.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Download an image from ComfyUI and save to local disk atomically with a sidecar manifest.' This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like comfy_send_to_td and comfy_send_to_blender by naming local disk as the destination.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when an image needs to be transferred from ComfyUI outputs to a local directory. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is unambiguous and sufficient for selection among the many ComfyUI tools.

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