shader

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

Annotations provide only basic hints (readOnlyHint=false, etc.) and the description adds no behavioral context beyond listing actions. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or constraints (e.g., whether write overwrites files or appends).

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 extremely short (two sentences), which is concise but not front-loaded with key purpose. Some redundancy exists (repeating 'help tool') and it omits important details like the effect of each action.

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 has 5 parameters, no output schema, and multiple distinct actions, the description fails to explain how actions differ or what they return. It relies entirely on the 'help tool' for completeness, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

Two of the five parameters have enums or implied domain (action enum, shader_type enum) and all parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3 as per the rule for high schema coverage.

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 'Godot shader management' and lists specific actions (create, read, write, get_params, list), clearly indicating it deals with shader operations. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'animation' or 'audio'.

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 only directs to 'use help tool for full docs' and provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other management tools or direct file editing). No prerequisites or context are given.

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