launch_editor

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

Annotations are all false, offering minimal safety context. The description compensates by clarifying the tool launches the editor GUI rather than the game, adding a meaningful behavioral distinction. It does not disclose whether the call blocks or returns immediately, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the primary action and immediately follow with a clarifying exclusion. Every word contributes to understanding without redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, exclusions, and alternatives. It is complete in context and requires no additional explanation to use correctly.

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 projectPath already described as 'Path to the Godot project directory.' The description adds only the general reference to 'a project' and does not provide additional parameter-specific detail, which is acceptable given full schema coverage.

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?

Uses a specific verb 'launch' with a clear resource: 'the Godot editor GUI for a project.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from run_project and run_interactive by stating it does not run the game, making the purpose unambiguous relative to siblings.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'Does not run the game' and names exact alternative tools: 'use run_project or run_interactive for that.' This is a clear directive for tool selection.

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