gdscript_validate

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true; description adds that the LSP is restored to on-disk content afterwards, indicating a temporary state change. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences plus a WHEN TO CALL note. Every sentence adds value, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Covers purpose, when to call, return values (valid flag, errors, warnings), and side effect (LSP restoration). Adequate for a validation tool with simple parameters and no output schema.

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 coverage is 100% and descriptions in schema are already clear. Description adds 'Full proposed file content' for content param, which does not add meaning beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'Check proposed file content for errors WITHOUT writing it to disk' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like gdscript_diagnostics (which checks on-disk content) and other code analysis tools.

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?

Explicitly says 'WHEN TO CALL: before writing an edit, so broken code never reaches the project.' Provides clear context for use, though does not name alternative tools for when not to use it.

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