defold_project_info

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

The description explicitly states 'Read and summarize,' indicating a read-only, non-destructive behavior. No annotations are provided, but the description itself sufficiently discloses the tool's behavior. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., side effects) are necessary given the simplicity.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and lists key outputs. Every word adds value; no unnecessary content.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no siblings, the description fully covers the necessary context. It explains what the tool reads and what information it summarizes, which is sufficient for an agent to decide to use it.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter information, but baseline 4 is appropriate for 0 parameters as per criteria.

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 tool reads and summarizes the game.project file, listing specific fields (title, resolution, main collection, dependencies). It uses a specific verb ('Read and summarize') and identifies the exact resource, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are given, the description implies it is appropriate when needing a summary of the game.project file. The lack of sibling tools reduces the need for differentiation, and the context is clear enough for an agent to infer usage.

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