ms_list_nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing operation and describes return fields, but it does not explicitly state safety, side effects, permissions, or engine/connection requirements.

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 definition is front-loaded and compact, using clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool, with no wasted text.

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 simple two-parameter listing operation and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate. However, it lacks annotations and does not explain how it relates to sibling listing/search tools, leaving some routing ambiguity.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains both optional parameters and gives concrete examples for category ('Filters', 'Generators') and tag ('underwater', 'oscillator'), adding useful meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'List MetaSounds nodes.' It adds the optional filtering scope by category or tag. It does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as ms_search_nodes or ms_list_categories, so it falls short of a 5.

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 mentions optional filters but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ms_search_nodes or ms_node_info, and no exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the word 'List.'

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