ui_tree_resource_get_node

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-style operation that returns one node, but it does not disclose behavior for invalid paths, precedence when both `index_path` and `path` are provided, or whether the returned node includes children.

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 focused sentence with no filler and front-loads the operation before the identifier parameters. However, it is so brief that it omits meaningful parameter guidance for the four undocumented parameters.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter descriptions, this one-sentence description leaves significant ambiguity. The agent cannot determine how `resource_uri`, `snapshot_id`, `session_id`, or `fields` affect the call, nor understand error behavior or identifier formats.

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 0% across six parameters, and the description only clarifies roles for `index_path` and `path`. Parameters such as `fields`, `session_id`, `snapshot_id`, and `resource_uri` remain unexplained, so the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 states a specific action, 'Return one node from a saved ui_tree resource', and names the two identification modes, `index_path` or `path`. The phrase 'one node' clearly differentiates it from sibling tools such as ui_tree_resource_children and ui_tree_resource_search.

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 implies use when a caller needs a single node from a saved ui_tree resource and knows its `index_path` or `path`. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings, nor does it mention exclusions or alternative tools.

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