Rewire Node

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

Annotations are absent, so description carries full burden. It reveals validation behavior but lacks information on destructive effects, reversibility, or consequences for other connections. Partial transparency.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant words. Front-loaded with action and resource. Every part earns its place.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description should provide more context (e.g., return value, whether operation is reversible, if existing wires are replaced or appended). Missing details for a mutation tool make it incomplete.

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%, so schema already describes parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific extra meaning beyond the schema. The validation mention is about tool behavior, not parameter details. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the specific action ('Replace wire connections') and the resource ('for a specific node in a flow tab'). It also mentions validation ('Validates all target IDs exist in the flow'), which adds specificity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add-node, remove-node, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The validation note implies a precondition but no when-to-use/when-not-to-use or comparisons to siblings like update-node. Usage context is inferred but not stated.

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