attach_script

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry this burden. It fails to disclose important behaviors: whether the tool overwrites existing script attachments, modifies the scene file permanently, or requires the project to be open. The term 'headless' is vague without further elaboration.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Could be slightly expanded for behavioral context, but remains concise.

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 a simple operation and full schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency. For a tool with no annotations or output schema, more context would be beneficial.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, but this 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?

The description states the specific action ('Attach a GDScript to a scene node') and adds the qualifier '(headless)', which clarifies the execution context. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'create_script' or 'modify_scene_node'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., modify_scene_node). There are no prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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