get_node_properties

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

Given readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, the description adds real value by disclosing that it 'Executes property getters' — explaining why the call is not purely read-only — and that it 'Does not change pause state'. It stops short of warning that getter execution may have arbitrary side effects, which would fully justify the non-read-only annotation.

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?

Two compact clauses, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by the behavioral caveats. No filler whatsoever.

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?

With no output schema, the description only partially covers return semantics via 'bounded typed values'. It omits nodePath addressing conventions and the sessionId follow-up requirement documented in the schema, leaving notable gaps for a live-session inspection tool.

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 only 33% (only sessionId is documented), so the description carries extra burden. It usefully explains the 'properties' parameter ('up to 50 named properties', echoing the maxItems cap) and hints at 'bounded typed values', but says nothing about the nodePath format or that sessionId is required for follow-up tools.

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 gives a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('named properties from a node in the live debug session') with a clear cap of 50. It is easily distinguished from set_node_properties and get_runtime_tree, though it does not explicitly contrast with the closest sibling, sample_node_properties.

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 phrase 'in the live debug session' implies the precondition that a session must be running, and 'Does not change pause state' hints at safe use during inspection. However, there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative such as sample_node_properties for repeated sampling.

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