Find Unused Files

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds useful behavioral nuance by saying files 'may not' be referenced, signaling that this is a heuristic analysis rather than a guaranteed determination. This helps the agent interpret results cautiously, though it does not detail scanning scope or limitations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 read-only, single-parameter analysis tool with an output schema, the description adequately states what the tool does and adds an important caveat about the heuristic nature of the results. It does not explain return values, but the output schema covers that, and no critical behavioral context appears missing.

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 schema fully documents the sole optional parameter 'project_path' with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline 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 a specific action ('Find') and a specific resource ('files that may not be referenced in scenes or scripts'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from generic file listing or search siblings like godot_get_project_files and godot_find_by_pattern.

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 intended use is implied by the name and description: identify potentially unused files during cleanup or review. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as listing all project files or using find_by_pattern, nor are any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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