godot_input

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions 'gated' but does not explain permissions, side effects, or return behavior. The tool modifies game state (injection) but the description omits what happens with different actions or error handling.

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 concise, front-loading the purpose and using a colon to list actions. However, it lacks structure like separate lines for parameters, which would improve readability. Overall, it is appropriately sized but could be better organized.

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 no output schema and 0% parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain return values, error cases, or parameter formatting. For a tool with only 2 params, the description should provide more complete context for correct invocation.

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 0% with no descriptions for parameters. The description only lists possible action values but does not clarify that 'action' expects one of these values or explain the 'params' parameter. This adds minimal 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 injects input into a running game and lists possible actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'godot_input_map' which handle input mapping. However, the term 'gated' is vague and not explained, slightly reducing clarity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The list of actions implies usage scenarios but lacks explicit instruction for an AI agent.

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