godot_resource

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

The description declares 'Read-only' indicating non-destructive behavior, but provides no further behavioral disclosure such as error handling, action case sensitivity, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries full burden and is insufficient.

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 (one sentence plus list) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is overly brief, sacrificing clarity for brevity.

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 lack of output schema and schema descriptions, the description should provide comprehensive context. It does not explain what each action does, how they differ, or what params are expected. The tool is incompletely described 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It lists actions and a path default, but does not explain the 'params' property, its structure, or how to use actions. This leaves significant 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 it is for 'Read-only resource inspection' and lists actions (inspect, list, find, info) and a path default (res://). This clearly indicates the tool's purpose, though it could be more specific about what constitutes a 'resource' compared to other entities.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like godot_node_read or godot_filesystem. The description implies it is for resource inspection, but does not provide when-not or alternative recommendations.

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