start_comfyui

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

With no annotations, the description provides key behavior: uses saved info, supports two install types, and waits up to 60s for API readiness. It doesn't cover error handling or permission requirements, but is largely transparent for its scope.

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, no superfluous words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by support details and a key behavioral note (60s wait). Highly efficient.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential usage and behavior. It could mention failure modes or prerequisites, but remains adequate for a tool with a simple interface.

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?

There are zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't add parameter info but explains the tool's reliance on saved process info, which contextualizes the param-less input.

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 that the tool starts ComfyUI using saved process info, supports two installation types, and waits for API readiness. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like stop_comfyui and restart_comfyui.

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?

It indicates usage after a stop_comfyui call by mentioning 'process info saved from a previous stop_comfyui call.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context implies it's for resuming, not initial launch.

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