node_create

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 does disclose core behavior (creates, adds to parent, instantiates scene) and the mutual exclusivity rule. However, it omits potential side effects like modifying the scene file, needing to save, or error conditions. More transparency would be beneficial for a mutation tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no filler. It efficiently covers both modes of operation and the key interaction rule. A model of conciseness.

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 the 6-parameter tool with an output schema present, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the two modes and the parent relationship. It could mention error handling or save requirements, but the core behavior and parameter semantics are adequately covered, and the output schema handles return values.

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?

All six parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable parameter semantics by explaining that type and scene_path are mutually exclusive and that scene_path takes precedence, which is not stated in the schema. This pushes the score to 4.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create (spawn) a new node in the scene tree.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like node_find and node_set_property by focusing on creation, and further clarifies the two modes of operation (type vs. scene instantiation).

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to create a new node or instantiate a PackedScene. It also offers a usage caveat about type/scene_path mutual exclusivity. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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