update_project_uidsRe-saves all scenes and resources to refresh UID references after upgrading a Godot 4.4+ project, preventing broken links.
Re-save every scene/resource so all references use up-to-date UIDs (Godot 4.4+). Useful after upgrading a project from an older Godot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projectPath | No | Folder containing project.godot. Optional: defaults to the project Claude Code is running in. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds meaningful context: this is a project-wide rewrite touching every scene/resource, and it applies to Godot 4.4+ projects. It does not contradict destructiveHint=false, though it does not discuss backups or whether files are written in place.
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 short sentences, zero filler, with the action and its effect front-loaded before the situational hint. Every clause 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?
For a one-parameter, annnotation-covered tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and when to use it. A note on scope/safety (e.g. that it rewrites project files in place) would close the only remaining gap.
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 the single parameter's real semantics (defaults to the running project) come from the schema itself. The description only adds the Godot 4.4+ version constraint, not parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (re-save) and resource scope (every scene/resource) plus the outcome (all references use up-to-date UIDs). An agent can distinguish this bulk UID refresh from siblings like get_uid (single lookup) or save_scene (single-scene write).
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?
"Useful after upgrading a project from an older Godot" gives clear triggering context for when to reach for it. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to run it, but the usage condition is explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.