build_csharp

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

Adds important context beyond annotations: isolated build, no effect on editor assembly, requires .NET SDK (already installed), first build restores packages. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=true.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive: purpose, safety, auto-detection, prerequisites, performance, and usage hint all in a few sentences. No unnecessary words.

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's simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description covers return format, safety, performance, and relative usage to sibling tools, making it fully actionable.

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 covers both parameters fully. Description adds value by noting auto-detection of .csproj and default configuration, but schema already provides descriptions.

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 it performs a compile-check using dotnet build for C# Godot projects, returning structured diagnostics. It distinguishes itself from write_script which does not cover C#.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after editing .cs' and notes that the GDScript compile-gate (write_script) does NOT cover C#, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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