Godot Asset Manager

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

The description discloses that the tool can be destructive (import, mkdir), which aligns with the destructiveHint=true annotation. However, it lacks detail on side effects, such as whether existing files are overwritten or if permissions are required. The annotation provides the safety context, so the description adds moderate value.

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 efficiently lists the tool's capabilities. While it is compact, it could be improved by structuring actions more clearly or indicating the primary action parameter.

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 tool has 7 parameters, outputs, and a destructive annotation, the description is too brief. It does not cover error scenarios, return value structure, or usage patterns for individual actions, which limits its completeness for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100%, with all parameters having descriptions in the schema. The tool description groups parameters by action but does not add new semantic detail beyond what is already in the schema. Thus, the description provides minimal added value for parameter understanding.

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 lists the main actions (scan, import, resolve UIDs, create folders), which correspond to the action enum. It's specific about the tool's purpose but does not differentiate it from sibling tools like godot_batch or godot_project, which may have overlapping capabilities.

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. There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria mentioned, leaving the agent to infer applicability from the action list alone.

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