godot_audit_orphan_nodes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by stating the purpose (memory leak detection) but does not explain what the tool returns, how detection works, or the effect of the print_orphans_to_stdout parameter. It does not contradict annotations.

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 a single, compact sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word delivers meaning.

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's simplicity (one boolean parameter, clear schema, and an output schema exists), the description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps: it does not explain what the output looks like, when to prefer this over godot_clean_orphans, or the exact meaning of 'detect' beyond a high-level statement. These are not critical but would improve an agent's decision-making.

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 single parameter's description in the schema ('Whether to call Node.print_orphan_nodes() in engine stdout.') is explicit. The tool description adds no additional semantic value about parameters. With schema coverage at 100% for this parameter's meaning, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Detect memory leaks from unparented orphan nodes in SceneTree' clearly states a specific verb (detect) and resource (orphan nodes), and the tool name reinforces it. It is distinguishable from the sibling godot_clean_orphans based on the verb (detect vs clean), though it does not explicitly name alternatives. That excludes the top score.

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 relative to alternatives like godot_clean_orphans or the broader godot_audit_assets. The description does not mention conditions for use, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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