remnawave_nodes_get

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

Only states 'read' implying non-destructive, but no details on authentication requirements, error behavior, or side effects. With no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate behavioral context.

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?

Extremely concise but to the point of being unhelpful. A single sentence that adds little value beyond the tool name and a vague 'read' indicator.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, 0% schema coverage, and many siblings, the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to specify which node, or how parameters work.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no clarification for any of the 4 parameters (payload, confirmToken, responseMode, mutationApproved). The presence of mutationApproved with default false for a read operation is confusing and unexplained.

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?

Description says 'nodes.get (read)' which indicates it's a read operation for nodes, but does not specify if it retrieves a single node by identifier or all nodes. It is somewhat vague and does not clearly differentiate from remnawave_nodes_list, which likely lists all nodes.

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?

No usage guidance provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool versus sibling tools like remnawave_nodes_list, remnawave_nodes_create, etc.

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