List Script Files

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the read-only behavior is already communicated by annotations. The description adds that this lists all scripts in the project, but it does not disclose additional behavior such as recursion, ordering, or filtering, though the output schema may cover the return format.

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 that contains the necessary information (action, object, scope) and no filler. Every word 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 simple read-only listing tool, the description plus annotations and output schema provide a reasonably complete contract. It does not explain when to use an alternative tool, but the parameters and return values are covered by the 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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not need to repeat them; its omission of parameter details is acceptable.

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 (List), a specific resource type (.gd script files), and a scope (the Godot project). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like godot_list_scenes and godot_list_resources without needing extra context.

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 description: use it when you need to enumerate script files in a Godot project. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives such as godot_get_project_files or godot_find_by_pattern, nor does it state exclusions.

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