scaffold_project_structure

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not indicate whether the tool overwrites existing folders, requires an empty project, or creates any files. The agent cannot determine side effects or safety of calling the tool on an existing project.

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 concise sentence that is easy to parse. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose. While it could benefit from more details, it achieves high conciseness without unnecessary words.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the effect of different presets, whether the tool can be re-run safely, or what the resulting folder structure looks like. The agent lacks sufficient context to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The enum presets and required path are already documented in the schema, so no extra value is provided.

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 tool creates a 'standard folder structure' for a 'Godot project', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_project' which create entire project files, whereas this focuses solely on folder structure. However, it does not explicitly mention the available presets (standard, minimal, full), which are part of the schema.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is no mention of when to use 'scaffold_project_structure' instead of 'create_project' or 'validate_project_structure'. The description lacks any usage context or prerequisites.

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