list_nodesRetrieve available Nimbus pipeline node types by category, including data, preprocessing, features, and models, to choose components for EEG/BCI workflows.
List Nimbus pipeline node types (data, preprocessing, features, models...).
Use get_node_schema(node_type) for one node's full config schema and ports.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it only implies a safe read ('List'). It says nothing about pagination, ordering, result size, or whether the list is static or registry-driven. Adequate for a simple enumeration, but thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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 short sentences with zero filler; the primary purpose is front-loaded and the routing hint follows. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description covers purpose plus sibling routing. The only meaningful gap is the unclarified 'category' filter, which with 0% schema coverage is left partly to inference.
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 0% and the single 'category' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The parenthetical ('data, preprocessing, features, models...') effectively illustrates valid category values, which adds real meaning, but it never states that these are the accepted filter values or what an omitted category returns.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List Nimbus pipeline node types') and even enumerates the domain categories, so the agent immediately knows this returns the catalog of node types rather than one node's details. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling get_node_schema.
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?
Explicitly routes the agent: use this to list node types, use get_node_schema(node_type) when you need one node's full config schema and ports. That is a clear when-to-use-this-vs-that statement, though it stops short of stating exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.