create_mod

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation (project creation) but says nothing about what happens on name collisions, whether an existing project is overwritten, what permissions or editor state are required, or what the tool returns on success/failure. The one useful disclosure is that the tool may be unavailable depending on editor scripting exposure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core action first and the caveat second; nothing is wasted. The trailing conditional is slightly muddying but is the only extra 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?

For a creation/mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and undocumented parameters, the description is too thin. An agent needs to know template sourcing, substitution behavior, and failure/overwrite semantics before invoking it safely.

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% for all three parameters. The description only obliquely connects to 'template'; it never explains what 'name' controls, what values 'template' accepts, or what 'substitutions' does (presumably key/value replacement inside template files). With zero coverage and no compensating text, the agent is guessing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Create a mod project from a template'. An agent can tell it produces a new mod project. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like duplicate_asset or list_templates, and the trailing conditional ('if the editor exposes templates to scripting') introduces doubt about whether the operation is even available.

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 versus duplicate_asset, list_templates, or open_mod_panel. The conditional clause hints at a precondition but is a caveat about editor capability, not a usage rule or an alternative-routing instruction. The agent must infer that list_templates should be called first to obtain a valid template value.

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