get_project_info

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

No annotations provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects (likely read-only), error behavior for invalid paths, or required permissions. 'Retrieve metadata' implies read-only but does not confirm.

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 sentence, no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Retrieve'. However, it could be expanded minimally to improve clarity without losing 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, the description should hint at return format or content. It does not. Also lacks examples or context about projectPath format (absolute/relative). With 20 sibling tools, more specificity would help.

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 100% (projectPath described as 'Path to the Godot project directory'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond schema. For high coverage, baseline 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 states the tool retrieves metadata about a Godot project, which is clear but vague. 'Metadata' is unspecific—could include project name, version, etc. It does not differentiate from siblings like get_project_version (if it existed) or get_godot_version, but since there is no direct sibling for project metadata, it is minimally adequate.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention contexts such as 'use this to get project details before editing' or exclude scenarios like 'do not use for engine settings'.

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