index_all_nodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'explore by category' but does not specify whether the output is a list, grouped categories, or if it includes node metadata. Lack of details about side effects (none assumed), response format, or error handling.

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 is front-loaded and efficient. It conveys the core function without extraneous words. Could be slightly improved by structuring categories or adding a brief note about output, but still concise.

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 simple nature of the tool (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately states the purpose. However, it leaves ambiguity about the output format (list? grouped?) and does not mention any prerequisites or limitations. It is minimally sufficient for a browsing tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the exploration purpose but does not need to describe parameter semantics. Baseline score for 0-parameter tools is 4.

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 specifies the action ('explore'), the resource ('n8n node library'), and the purpose ('find the right node for a task'). It mentions categorization by category (Core, App, Trigger), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_node_specs that focus on specific nodes.

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 when to use the tool ('to find the right node for a task') but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_node_specs or other sibling tools. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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