physics_manage

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

No annotations provided, and the description offers no behavioral details: no mention of side effects, error handling, required permissions, or output format. The tool is effectively a black box beyond the schema.

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 very short (2 sentences) but this brevity sacrifices essential information. It is concise but not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, lacking necessary details.

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 dispatches 8 distinct physics operations with an open-ended params object, the description is severely incomplete. No information about operation semantics, required parameters per op, or return values is provided. The schema alone is insufficient.

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% (both op and params are described), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters, but the schema already enumerates valid op values and defines params as an object.

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?

Description states 'Godot physics operations' which is vague and does not specify a concrete action. It reads as a category rather than a specific verb+resource, and fails to distinguish from sibling tools like animation_manage.

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 only guidance is to call godot_catalog for the operation tree, which implies the tool is a dispatcher. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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