game_list_signals

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

Annotations provide no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint, so description must disclose behavior. It only states 'list all signals on a node with connections' without clarifying whether it lists only signals that have connections or includes unconnected signals, nor does it mention return format or side effects. For a read operation this is minimal disclosure.

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?

Single sentence with 8 words, no redundant information. Every part contributes to the purpose.

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 tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but lacks details like return type, error conditions, or interpretation of 'with connections'. It misses an opportunity to fully inform the agent.

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 100% with nodePath fully described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'Path to the node'. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema already handles 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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'signals on a node' with a qualifier 'with connections', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like manage_scene_signals (which deals with scene-wide signals). It explicitly states the action and scope.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like game_connect_signal, game_disconnect_signal, game_emit_signal, or manage_scene_signals. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., node must exist) or exclusions.

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