Install live bridge addon

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that it adds files under addons/godot_assistant and enables the plugin, and explicitly mentions install or remove. However, it doesn't elaborate on reversibility of uninstall or permission requirements.

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 main purpose, and every sentence adds value—purpose, optionality, scope, and side effects. No wasted words.

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 tool with no output schema and optional parameters, the description covers the main behavior and side effects adequately. It doesn't explain the status action's return format or prerequisites (e.g., project detection from --project), but the schema covers some of that.

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?

The schema covers project with a description, but the action parameter (install/status/uninstall) has no schema description and the tool description doesn't explain it. Since schema coverage is only 50% and the description adds no parameter-level meaning, the action semantics (especially what 'status' does) remain unclear.

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 installs or removes the optional Godot addon that enables live features, listing specific capabilities (inspecting, simulating input, screenshotting, driving play/stop). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like run_project or editor_control.

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?

It explicitly says 'Everything else works without it,' providing a clear 'when-not-to-use' signal by indicating the addon is optional and only needed for live features. It doesn't name an alternative tool, but no direct alternative exists among siblings.

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