comfyui_get_node_info

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context about the return dict and optional flags like deprecated and experimental, without contradicting any annotations.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a compact enumeration of return keys. Every sentence contributes value with no wasted words.

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 simple read-only info tool, the description fully covers the return structure and the parameter, and it is supported by strong annotations and schema. No gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter description includes an example and a pointer to list_nodes. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states it retrieves input/output schema and metadata for a single ComfyUI node type, using the specific verb 'Get' and a specific resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like comfyui_list_nodes (which lists all nodes) and comfyui_get_model_metadata.

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 implies use for single-node lookups but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. The schema hint about using comfyui_list_nodes to discover class names is helpful, but it is not part of the description text itself.

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