Add Golden Config Node

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-destructive write. The description adds context about what nodes represent, but does not disclose details like error handling, idempotency, or side effects beyond the annotation-provided safety profile.

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 two sentences: the first states the primary action, the second adds valuable context about node semantics. It is front-loaded with the action and avoids unnecessary fluff.

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 moderate complexity (5 parameters, output schema present), the description adequately covers the domain by explaining nodes in Golden Configuration trees. It does not need to explain return values since an output schema exists, and the parameter schema covers field-level details.

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 100%, so the input schema already describes all five parameters. The description adds general context about nodes but does not provide additional parameter-specific meaning, such as how 'path' relates to hierarchy or how 'version' determines tree structure.

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 'Add a new node to an existing Golden Configuration tree,' which is a specific verb+resource action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_golden_config_tree, which creates the entire tree rather than adding nodes to an existing one.

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 the tool is used when you need to add a configuration section or component to an existing tree, and the context about hierarchical organization and versioning provides clear usage context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool list makes the distinction clear enough.

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