godot_node_edit

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

No annotations exist, so description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions 'Undo/Redo' which is helpful, but 'gated' is ambiguous. It does not disclose mutation side effects, permissions, or limitations of actions, leaving significant transparency gaps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then action list. No fluff, but the action list could be more readable (e.g., bullet points). Slightly above average for 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 no output schema and two poorly described parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain output, prerequisites, or specific action behaviors. For a multi-action tool, lacking detail reduces usability.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description lists possible actions, adding meaning to the 'action' parameter. However, it fails to explain the 'params' parameter (type, structure, usage), so only partial compensation.

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 'Edit editor nodes' as the verb+resource, and lists 13 specific actions, making the tool's purpose explicit and distinguishing it from sibling tools like godot_node_read or godot_editor_read which are read-only.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., godot_editor_edit). The term 'gated' is mentioned but not explained, and there are no prerequisites or context for when each action is appropriate.

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