editor_add_node

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It covers live appearance, selection, undo via Ctrl+Z, and non-persistence until save. It does not mention failure modes or editor availability, so it is not exhaustive, but it is unusually informative.

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?

Three short sentences, each containing essential information: the core purpose, immediate behavioral effects, and save/alternative guidance. There is no filler.

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 or output schema, the description covers the most important operational facts: live update, selection, undo, non-save, and sibling distinction. It omits return values and edge cases like 'editor not open', but the essentials for correct invocation are present.

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 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters in detail. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable but not additive.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Adds a node to the scene open in the Godot editor.' It also explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling add_node by saying 'Prefer this over add_node while the editor is open.'

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 gives clear usage context: use this when the editor is open, prefer it over add_node under those conditions, and understand that the scene isn't saved until editor_save_scene. This effectively routes the agent between competing tools.

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