Get Dynamic Node Outcomes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds behavioral context: calculation depends on config, useful for wiring connections. No contradictions; reasonably transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, but description hints at return (connections to wire). Could be more explicit about output format, but sufficient for a calculation tool with good annotations.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond input schema: explains config examples for PageNode and ChoiceCollectorNode, and directs to getNodeTypeDetails for schema details. Schema coverage is 100%, but description enriches understanding.

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?

Clearly states 'Calculate the dynamic outcomes for a node based on its configuration' with specific node examples (PageNode, ChoiceCollectorNode). Distinguishes purpose from sibling tools like getNodeTypeDetails by focusing on outcome calculation vs schema retrieval.

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 says 'Use this for nodes whose outcomes depend on their config' and provides concrete examples. Lacks exclusion criteria or alternatives, but context is strong.

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