get_context_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose important behavioral aspects such as whether the tool returns full node listings, whether it can fail on invalid contexts, or performance characteristics. The description is minimal and does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond the name.

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 brief, which is appropriate for the simplicity of the tool, but it is not front-loaded with the most important info. The purpose is clear in the first sentence, but essential details (what information is returned) are absent. It is not overly long, but it could be more effective with a clearer statement of the tool's focus.

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 (1 param) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is far from complete. It does not explain what kind of information is returned per context, which is critical for the agent to know before invoking. The tool could benefit from a brief explanation of typical use cases (e.g., understanding node hierarchy) and content of the returned data.

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%, so the description must explain the context parameter. It gives an example of valid values ('/obj', '/stage', '/out'), which is helpful, but it does not explain the expected format (leading slash required) or what kinds of contexts are valid beyond examples.

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 states the verb 'Get information' and the resource 'Houdini network context', but it is vague about what information is actually returned (nodes, parameters, flags, etc.). It does not distinguish from sibling tools like get_network_overview or get_node_info, making it unclear how this differs.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_network_overview, get_stage_info, or get_node_info. The description only mentions the context path parameter but gives no context for the difference between network contexts like '/obj' vs '/stage'.

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