get_hda_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation via 'Get' but does not state whether it is safe, whether it requires a connected Houdini session, what 'detailed information' includes, or whether any side effects occur.

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 short and front-loads the purpose. The Args block is minimal, though including the non-schema 'ctx' argument slightly reduces clarity.

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 getter with three optional, undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain which identifier to use, what the return contains, or how to interpret the result, leaving an agent unable to call it correctly in common cases.

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 should compensate. Instead, it merely restates parameter names ('node_path: Node path', 'hda_file: HDA file path', 'type_name: HDA type name') without explaining formats, which one to supply, or whether they are mutually exclusive. It also mentions 'ctx', which is not in the schema, adding potential confusion.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about an HDA definition.' This is clear enough for an agent to know it retrieves HDA metadata, but it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_hda_sections, get_hda_section_content, or list_hda_versions.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus related HDA tools, nor any prerequisites or context. The description only lists arguments, which is not usage guidance.

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