listNodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions 'optional filtering' but does not disclose traits like pagination behavior, whether it returns all nodes by default, or if it has any side effects. The limit/offset parameters are defined in the schema but the description lacks behavioral context.

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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it is overly terse and lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or sections). It could convey more information in the same space without losing conciseness.

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 has three parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and multiple siblings, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value format, pagination behavior, or how filtering interacts with other listing tools. The agent may struggle to use it correctly without additional context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds only 'optional filtering', which does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond the schema. It does not clarify how type, limit, and offset interact or provide examples. No additional value beyond the 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 'List nodes with optional filtering' states the verb and resource clearly, but it is generic. Given multiple sibling tools that also list nodes (e.g., listNodesByPage, findNodesByName), the description does not differentiate this tool's purpose or scope, making it vague in context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no indication of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent must infer from the schema and sibling names alone.

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