project_export

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

With no annotations provided, the description covers key behaviors like debug and export_pack flags, but lacks disclosure of side effects (e.g., file overwriting) or error conditions. It is adequate but not fully transparent.

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: one sentence for the summary, a category line, and a bulleted list of parameters. No redundant information, and the most important details are front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and all parameters well. However, it omits context about preconditions (e.g., export preset must exist) and what happens on failure. Given the presence of an output schema, return values are not needed, but error handling context would improve completeness.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context for each parameter (e.g., 'Path to the Godot project directory', 'Name of the export preset (as defined in export_presets.cfg)'). This goes beyond schema titles, though it does not explain relationships between parameters.

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 'Export a Godot project using the specified export preset,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like project_run or project_list by focusing on export functionality.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., project_run, project_list). The description does not mention prerequisites, such as the need for a configured export preset, or exclusions.

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