Godot Script TODO Index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies this is a read-only search operation but doesn't state whether it only scans .gd files, whether results are returned in a specific format, or whether it searches across all scripts in the project or only a subset. As a read operation the risk is low, but behavior is minimally disclosed.

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, clear sentence that states exactly what the tool does. Zero wasted words, perfectly front-loaded. The description earns its place entirely.

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?

This is a simple zero-parameter tool, so the description arguably needs less. However, it gives no indication of the return format (list of files? line numbers?), which comments patterns are matched (exact case sensitivity?), or scope (all scripts vs currently open). No output schema exists to fill these gaps.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by definition (nothing to document). With no parameters, the description doesn't need to add parameter semantics; the baseline of 4 is appropriate since there are no params to explain.

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 verb (find) and resource (TODO, FIXME, HACK comments in scripts). It distinguishes from siblings like godot_project_grep and godot_script_list by specifying the specific comment types, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from those alternatives.

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 versus sibling alternatives. There is no clear comparison to godot_project_grep (which could also search for these terms), no exclusions, and no description of what makes this the preferred choice for finding TODO comments specifically.

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