quit_godot

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description earns credit by naming the concrete consequence ('Unsaved editor changes may be lost') and the blocking behavior ('wait for exit'). Not a full 5 only because it doesn't say what happens if no editor is running or what is returned after exit.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive caveat placed immediately after the action so it is read before invocation.

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 no-output-schema, zero-required-param termination tool, the description covers action, scope, consequence, and blocking semantics. Minor gap: no statement of what happens if no editor is running or how the exit is reported.

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 single optional sessionId is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about when sessionId matters or what the default behavior is without it.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Terminate the editor launched by this server'. The scoping phrase 'launched by this server' helps distinguish it from a general editor shutdown, though it never names the nearest siblings (stop_project, close_session) that an agent might confuse it with.

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?

Usage is only implied: you call it when you're done with the editor. There is no explicit statement about when to prefer this over stop_project or close_session, and no note about whether it should be called before other teardown tools.

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