node_detail

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes the output as a 'full probe result' but omits details like read-only nature, rate limits, or side effects, leaving significant ambiguity for a mutation-free tool.

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 sentences and quickly conveys the core purpose. However, it could be structured to separate purpose from output details for better readability.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and moderate tool complexity, the description lacks essential context such as error cases, required permissions, or what 'cluster reference data' entails, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description provides no additional meaning for the 'name' parameter beyond the fact that it identifies a node. No format, examples, or constraints are given.

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 states the tool returns a 'full probe result for a single node by name', including cluster reference data. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like fleet_status or bootstrap_builder_host.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context signals include many sibling tools but no comparison.

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