List any Godot class's properties and methods with signatures, so you know which values to set and what to call before writing GDScript.
List a class's properties and methods (with signatures) so you know exactly what to set_property / call_method. The discovery key for full domain coverage.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| class | Yes | ||
| inherited | No | include inherited members (default false) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, confirming a safe read. The description adds that it returns signatures of properties and methods, which is useful but does not heavily elaborate beyond what is obvious from the name and annotations.
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 sentences, zero filler. The first sentence clearly states the action and output, making it easy to scan.
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?
With no output schema, the description could explain the return format (e.g., JSON structure). It mentions 'with signatures' but does not describe the structure, leaving some ambiguity for a complex tool.
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 50%; the 'inherited' parameter has a description. The description implies 'class' is the class name (e.g., 'Node2D') but does not specify format or provide examples, partially compensating but not fully.
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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'a class's properties and methods (with signatures)', and explicitly connects to sibling tools 'set_property' and 'call_method'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'find_classes' by positioning itself as the discovery key for full domain coverage.
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 implies usage context: before calling 'set_property' or 'call_method'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'find_classes' for just listing class names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.