add_script

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'create and register' without explaining side effects, error behavior (e.g., if the script already exists), or whether registration modifies project files in a way that could be destructive or require specific permissions.

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 a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core action without waste. The acronym 'YYP' is not expanded, which slightly hurts clarity for agents unfamiliar with GameMaker terminology, but overall it is appropriately terse.

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 simple three-parameter creation tool, the description names the core action and target resource. However, it omits key context such as expected project structure, prerequisites like an existing project, failure modes, and what registering in the YYP actually does—leaving the agent with only a high-level understanding.

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% for all three parameters, so the description need not repeat them. However, it adds no extra meaning beyond the schema—like the relationship between scriptName and the YYP registration or how code defaults are applied.

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 'Create' and the resource 'GML script', then adds 'register it in the YYP' to indicate the integration step. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_sprite_from_images or add_object, which target different resource types.

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 when a new script is needed but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned, so the agent gets only inferred context.

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