Check ComfyUI health and generation status in a rich card, including system status, VRAM, workflow count, and model count.
Show ComfyUI health and generation status as a rich in-chat card.
Prefab UI card with system status, VRAM, workflow count, model count
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it shows a card with system status and counts, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm that no state changes occur, nor does it mention any side effects or requirements. For a display tool, the risk is low but still under-specified.
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 two lines of intent plus a brief return-format note. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and adds a useful detail about the card contents, with no waste.
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 has no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential return content. However, it does not clarify how this differs from the sibling show_generation_card, which is a notable contextual gap for an agent selecting between them.
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, so there is nothing to add beyond the schema. The description correctly omits parameter details, and the schema coverage is 100% (trivially). This is a baseline 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 states a specific action ('show') and resource ('ComfyUI health and generation status') and mentions it returns a rich in-chat card. It is clear and distinct from generation-specific tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling show_generation_card, so not a 5.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as show_generation_card or the comfy_* family. The description does not state any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.