get_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It adds that the node contains executor information, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose any other side effects, authentication requirements, or potential errors. It is minimally adequate but could be improved.

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 very concise: a main sentence, a clarifying sentence, and a structured Args/Returns block. No wasted words, and key information is front-loaded. It earns its place with every sentence.

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 simplicity (single parameter, output schema exists), the description is fairly complete. It explains the purpose and parameter. The return value is described as 'The node', which is vague but acceptable since an output schema provides structure. Could mention prerequisites but overall adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explicitly stating 'name: The name of the node' in the Args block. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition. However, it does not elaborate beyond labeling the parameter.

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 'Get a specific node from Jenkins' which is a specific verb+resource. It also mentions 'Contains executor about the node', providing additional detail. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_all_nodes' and 'get_node_config' by focusing on a single node and its executor info.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest sibling tools like 'get_all_nodes' for listing nodes. The usage context is implied but not explicitly addressed.

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