create_shader

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It states 'Create' which implies file creation, but does not mention side effects like overwriting existing files, file permission requirements, or whether the content must be valid .gdshader syntax. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it could be more informative without adding length, such as including the requirement for valid .gdshader content.

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 absence of an output schema and the tool's low complexity (3 required params, no nested objects), the description should explain what happens after creation (e.g., returns success, file path). It does not address this, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's outcome. The description is incomplete for safe autonomous use.

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 67%, with two out of three parameters (shaderPath and content) having descriptions in the schema. However, the overall description 'with content' does not add meaning beyond the schema. For the parameter projectPath, which lacks a schema description, the tool description provides no clarification. The value added is low.

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 action ('Create') and the specific resource ('Godot shader file (.gdshader)'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like create_script, which creates GDScript files. The verb-resource combination is distinct and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_script for scripts, or other file creation tools). There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions for use, or when not to use it. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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