Get Node Material Graph Info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must handle transparency. It describes the output (node spaces, active space, alias table) but does not disclose read-only nature, error behavior, or side effects. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 concise sentences with no extraneous information. The first explains the tool's output, the second provides usage context. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, output, and workflow context (use before apply_graph_description). Lacks details on return format, error handling, and prerequisites, but for a simple read tool with one param, it is fairly complete.

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% (the only parameter 'handle' is documented). The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, which is acceptable per baseline but does not add extra value.

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 tool reports which node spaces a material exposes, the active one, and the alias table. It also distinguishes itself by mentioning use before `apply_graph_description`, differentiating it from siblings.

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 explicitly says 'Use this before `apply_graph_description` to confirm the right `node_space` is addressable,' providing clear context and an alternative tool. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but is sufficient.

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