disconnect_geonode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action ('Disconnect an input') but does not mention side effects, such as what happens if the input is already disconnected, whether all connections are removed, or any required state. This is minimal disclosure.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant phrases. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 4-parameter schema and absence of annotations, this description is underspecified. It does not provide enough context about required parameters, prerequisites, or expected behavior, even though an output schema exists. The tool is a specialized geometry node operation, and the description leaves out critical context for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only says 'an input on a geometry node,' which clarifies that 'input' refers to a node input, but it does not explain the roles of 'object,' 'modifier,' or 'node,' nor the expected format of 'input' (string name vs integer index). The description adds little meaning beyond the tool name.

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 uses the specific verb 'Disconnect' and identifies the resource as 'an input on a geometry node.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'connect_geonodes' (which connects) and 'delete_geonode' (which deletes). It directly states what the tool does.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or what prerequisites must be met. It does not mention exclusions or specific scenarios, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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