get_instance_overrides

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly implies a read operation (get) and mentions that overrides can be applied elsewhere. However, it does not disclose the return format, any limitations, or behavioral details like whether it works only on component instances. It avoids contradictions as no annotations exist.

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, each providing essential information: the core action and the purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition. Front-loaded well.

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 is adequate for a simple tool with 1 optional parameter. However, it lacks information about the return format (what 'all override properties' looks like) and does not explain error cases or behavior when no selection exists. With no output schema, the description should provide more context on the response.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description of nodeId. The description adds context about the purpose of overrides but does not enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 gets all override properties from a selected component instance and explains how these overrides can be applied to other instances. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_node_info or set_instance_overrides.

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 gives a hint about when to use (to apply overrides to other instances) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. It lacks guidance on prerequisites like having a selection, and does not contrast with related tools like clone_node or get_node_info.

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