Export project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions presets must exist but does not explain that building writes output files, may overwrite existing files, or what the list action returns. The mutation behavior is under-disclosed.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It has no wasted words and reads clearly.

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 5-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps: it does not disclose side effects, output expectations, or when the project parameter is needed. The schema covers parameter semantics well but does not compensate for missing behavioral context.

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 input schema describes all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to the action enum by clarifying 'build one' as an export/build operation and gives a prerequisite for presets, providing some value beyond the schema.

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 lists export presets or builds one, identifying the resource and actions. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like run_project, and 'build one' is slightly ambiguous, but the overall purpose is understandable.

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 use when working with Godot export presets and provides a prerequisite (presets must be created in the editor). However, it does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or state any exclusions.

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