pathrule_get_nodeFetch a single tree node and the IDs of its attached memories, rules, and skills by providing workspace and node UUIDs.
Return a single node plus ids for attached memories, rules, and skills. Requires workspace_id to prevent cross-workspace ambiguity.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspace_id | Yes | Workspace UUID from pathrule_list_workspaces. | |
| node_id | Yes | Tree node UUID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by detailing the return includes IDs for memories, rules, and skills, and warns about workspace ambiguity. No contradictions.
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, front-loaded with the main purpose, no extraneous words. Efficient and clear.
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?
For a simple read operation with annotations and high schema coverage, the description completely covers what the agent needs: what it returns and a key constraint. No output schema needed.
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 100%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description adds context that workspace_id prevents ambiguity, providing extra meaning 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 tool returns a single node plus IDs for attached items. It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like pathrule_get_tree.
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 notes the requirement for workspace_id to prevent cross-workspace ambiguity, providing clear context for when to use. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives but gives sufficient guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.