godot_setup_xr_rig

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

The description says 'scaffold' implying creation of nodes, which aligns with the readOnlyHint=false annotation, but it does not disclose side effects such as modifying the scene tree, requirements for an active scene, or behavior when nodes already exist. No additional behavioral context beyond the annotation is provided.

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, succinct sentence that conveys the core functionality without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and target nodes, making it easy to scan.

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?

For a tool with five parameters and a specific scene-modifying operation, the description is far too brief. It omits important context such as prerequisites (e.g., an active scene), what happens to existing nodes, whether hand tracking is included, and any post-conditions. Although an output schema exists, the description does not elaborate on side effects or setup requirements.

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 description mentions no parameters at all. Although the input schema includes descriptions for each parameter (rig_name, parent_path, etc.), the tool description adds zero value in explaining parameter purpose or usage. Since schema description coverage is effectively 0% from the description's perspective, the description fails to compensate, leaving agents to rely solely on 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's purpose: it scaffolds a specific set of nodes (XROrigin3D, XRCamera3D, XRController3D) for an XR tracking rig. The verb 'scaffold' is specific and the resource is explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like godot_configure_xr_passthrough which focus on different aspects of XR setup.

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, nor any prerequisites or conditions (e.g., requires an active scene, whether it replaces existing rigs, or when hand tracking should be enabled). It simply states what it does without context on selection or invocation.

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