Forge Engine MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it states the tool removes a node, it doesn't describe critical behaviors: whether this is destructive/permanent, if it requires specific permissions, what happens to child nodes, error conditions (e.g., invalid path), or return values. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Remove a node') and includes essential context ('from the Godot scene tree by its path'). Every element earns its place.

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 this is a mutation tool (removing nodes) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like destructiveness, error handling, or what happens upon success/failure. For a tool that modifies scene state, more context is needed to use it safely and effectively.

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%, with the single parameter 'path' fully documented in the schema (including an example). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema—it merely restates that removal is 'by its path.' With high schema coverage, the baseline score 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 clearly states the specific action ('Remove a node') and target resource ('from the Godot scene tree by its path'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'forge_move_node' (which moves rather than removes) and 'forge_add_node' (which adds rather than removes). It uses precise terminology that matches the domain context.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the node must exist, if the scene must be open), exclusions (e.g., can't remove root nodes), or related tools like 'forge_move_node' for repositioning instead of removal. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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