Get Trace Node Details

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) already indicate safe read-only behavior. The description adds context about what the trace node includes and the source of node IDs, which is helpful and does not contradict 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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and efficiently provide the key source of input data. No unnecessary words.

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 no output schema and multiple siblings, the description adequately specifies inputs and output content. However, it could further differentiate from similar trace tools and clarify the response format beyond the parameter.

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 75%, with three of four parameters documented. The description only reinforces the node ID source. The undocumented showRealNumbers parameter is not addressed, so the description adds minimal 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 clearly states the action 'Get detailed trace node' and specifies the content: parameters, context, result, and errors. It also distinguishes from siblings by noting that node IDs come from openl_get_trace_nodes.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool after openl_get_trace_nodes, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like openl_get_trace_parameter. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites beyond node IDs.

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