godot_find_elements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Locate' is consistent with this, signaling a query-style operation. However, it adds no behavioral traits beyond the annotations, such as performance implications, search scope, or how results are ordered. The operation is clearly non-destructive, but that's already captured by 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero fluff. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose, and the selector list adds specificity without redundancy. This is a model of concise, effective description.

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?

The tool is simple (a read-only finder), and annotations plus an output schema cover many basics. However, the description misses the chance to clarify when to use 'root_path' to scope searches or how 'max_results' impacts results. Given the schema has rich descriptions for these, the gap is mitigated but not eliminated.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially covers the 'query' parameter by listing example values ('text, name, class, group, or role') but omits 'property' and 'path', which are valid selector types. It does not address 'root_path' or 'max_results' at all. Given the low coverage, this is a notable gap in helping the agent understand parameter usage.

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 uses a clear verb ('Locate') and resource ('UI elements'), and specifies the search dimensions (text, name, class, group, or role). It implicitly differentiates from siblings like godot_get_node or godot_list_nodes, though without naming them explicitly. The plural 'elements' and selector list make the tool's scope obvious.

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 implies usage when needing to find UI elements by the listed selectors, but it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it. The schema's selector_type documentation enriches this context, but the description itself stays generic. No explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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