godot_analyze_scene

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by specifying what analysis it performs (antipatterns, format errors). It does not mention authentication or side effects, but these are covered by 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 with zero wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded ('Parse .tscn... and return structured analysis') followed by specific detections.

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 no output schema, the description could mention return structure (e.g., 'returns JSON with issues found'). However, it adequately covers behavior for a simple read-only analysis 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 100% and the schema description for 'path' is clear ('Path to .tscn or .tres file...'). The tool description adds no further parameter semantics beyond restating file types, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool parses .tscn/.tres files and returns structured analysis, detecting specific antipatterns and errors. It distinctly differs from sibling tools like godot_analyze_script (which targets scripts) and godot_get_diagnostics (likely broader diagnostics).

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 for analyzing scene/resource files, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives. However, the sibling names provide clear differentiation, so the context is directionally sufficient.

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