List Autoload Scripts

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already conveys the safety profile, so the description isn't required to restate that. The description adds only that it lists autoload singletons, but doesn't mention behavior around the optional project_path parameter, such as what happens when it's null or how the project is located.

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 four-word sentence with no filler or redundant content. It is efficiently front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 simple read-only list operation with an output schema, the description plus annotations are nearly complete. The only notable gap is the absence of guidance about how project_path behaves, but this is minor given the schema already marks it as optional.

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 description coverage is 100% since the only parameter, project_path, has 'Optional project root' in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond this, so the baseline of 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?

The description 'List autoload singletons' uses a clear verb and resource, and 'autoload singletons' distinguishes this from sibling list tools such as godot_list_scripts and godot_list_resources. However, it relies on Godot-specific terminology and doesn't explicitly state the project scope or what an autoload singleton is.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., godot_list_scripts, godot_list_resources). It also doesn't explain whether the optional project_path should be supplied or what the default behavior is when it's omitted.

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