editor_launch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states it launches the editor but does not disclose whether it blocks, opens a new window, or requires the project path to be valid. It is adequate but not detailed.

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 very concise, with one sentence for purpose and a brief category/args format. It earns its place without waste, though a bit more structure (e.g., clear sections) could improve 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 an output schema exists, the description should explain what the tool returns. It omits this entirely. It also lacks details on side effects or project state after launch. For a simple tool, the description is incomplete.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It says 'Path to the Godot project directory', which clarifies the parameter is a directory path, but the schema already indicates 'Project Path' and string type. The addition is minimal.

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 launches the Godot editor for a specific project, using the verb 'Launch' and resource 'Godot editor'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that manipulate project internals rather than launching the editor.

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 like project_run, or on prerequisites such as requiring the project to exist. The description lacks any usage context or exclusions.

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