navigate_workspace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the tool only changes the user's view, does not affect the workflow, and is intentionally excluded from the undo stack to avoid ambiguity with Ctrl+Z. This is rich behavioral context beyond mere side-effects.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, followed by usage context, a behavioral note, and an Args block. Every sentence earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded. No filler or redundant repetition of schema.

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's moderate complexity, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, parameters, side effects, and alternatives. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: 'to' takes 'root', 'up', or a subgraph node id; 'client_id' selects the tab and defaults to the most recently focused one. This is precise and actionable.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Move the ComfyUI canvas into a subgraph, back out one level, or to the top.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_workspace_graph (reading) and set_workspace_layout (layout) by emphasizing navigation scope.

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 states when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'The other workspace tools take scope="active", so this is how to point them inside a subgraph. For reading alone it is usually unnecessary: get_workspace_graph(scope="all") descends without moving the user's view.' Also notes the undo stack behavior, which is a key usage consideration.

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