godot_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions actions like 'export' implying mutability, but does not explain side effects (e.g., file creation, overwrites, required state). The agent cannot assess safety or side effects from this description alone.

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 very short and uses a compact notation (e.g., 'export(preset,dest_path)'), which is efficient but may be ambiguous. It front-loads the purpose but lacks explanatory sentences. Every character earns its place, but readability suffers.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown) and 2 parameters with no schema descriptions, the description provided is too minimal. It omits return value details, error handling, and any contextual information about the export process. A more complete description is necessary for reliable use.

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 has 0% parameter description coverage. The description adds value by listing action values and hinting at parameters for the 'export' action (preset, dest_path) and 'add_preset' (name, platform, settings). However, the mapping to the actual 'params' object structure is not formalized, leaving ambiguity.

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 states the tool is for 'Game export' and lists specific actions (presets, export, add_preset), giving a general purpose. However, it does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like godot_asset, and the exact resource is vague ('game' is broad). It meets minimum clarity but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., godot_asset, godot_filesystem). The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The agent has no basis for deciding when to invoke this tool over others.

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