creator_list_nodes

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'List the puppet node tree' clearly implies a read-only operation, and the parenthetical field list adds useful context. However, it does not mention hidden nodes, tree traversal order, or the behavioral impact of the 'detail' flag beyond the schema.

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 that front-loads the core action and includes a compact parenthetical list of returned fields. There is no wasted text or redundancy.

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 tool is a simple list operation with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description communicates the key output fields and the tree structure, which is sufficient for most use. It could be enhanced by explicitly stating whether children are nested recursively, but this is not a major gap.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single 'detail' parameter ('Include local transform on every node'), so the description does not need to repeat it. The tool description adds no further parameter semantics, justifying the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('puppet node tree'), and enumerates the returned fields (uuid, name, type, enabled, children). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like creator_get_node and creator_list_parameters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as creator_get_node or creator_list_parameters. The description implies browsing the node tree but gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative scenarios.

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