manage_shader

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

No annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint) are provided. The description only states 'create or read' without disclosing whether creating overwrites existing files, what permissions are needed, or the behavior of the 'source' parameter. This is insufficient for a tool that performs both read and write operations.

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 minimal words, effectively conveying the core purpose without unnecessary detail. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 5 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the return value for read actions, the relationship between action and source, or how shaderType constrains the operation. The agent lacks critical details for correct invocation.

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 100%, meaning each parameter has a description in the schema. However, the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as clarifying that 'source' is required for creation or the implications of 'shaderType'. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Create or read .gdshader files' uses a specific verb (create/read) and resource (.gdshader files), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like game_set_shader_param (runtime shader parameter setting) and godot_parse_resource (general resource parsing).

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, such as when to create a shader file versus modify an existing one with game_set_shader_param. No explicit context or exclusions are given.

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