Get node parameters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description goes beyond by warning that a full parameter dump is large, explaining the token economy rationale, and disclosing that inputs/outputs are included unless omitted. This adds practical behavioral context not captured in annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The token economy point is repeated twice (keys and omit_io), which is slightly redundant, but the description remains 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?

Given the simple scope (3 params, full schema coverage, output schema exists, annotations present), the description fully covers purpose, usage, alternatives, and performance considerations. No critical gaps.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining why to use keys and omit_io (token economy) and that a full dump is large, which ties parameter choices to usage context.

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 verb ('read') and resource ('current parameters of one node'), and distinguishes it from siblings by explicitly naming compare_td_nodes for diffing. It also lists the exact return fields, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 names compare_td_nodes as the alternative for diffing two nodes, and explains when to use keys and omit_io for token economy. This gives clear context on when to use this tool vs. alternatives.

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