godot-mcp-pilot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the duplication includes children and placement under the same parent, but does not address permissions needed, whether this is a destructive operation, error conditions, or what happens if the new name conflicts with existing nodes.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main action and includes essential details about children and placement.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic operation but lacks details on behavioral aspects like error handling, return values, or side effects. It is complete enough for simple use but leaves gaps for more complex scenarios.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds minimal value by implying 'nodePath' identifies the original node and 'newName' is for the duplicate, but does not provide additional context beyond what the schema specifies.

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 action ('duplicate a node and its children'), specifies the resource ('node'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'add_node' (which creates new nodes) or 'move_node' (which relocates nodes). It provides specific scope details about placement and naming.

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 implicitly indicates this is for duplicating existing nodes within a scene, suggesting usage when copying node structures. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like 'add_node' for creating new nodes from scratch.

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