game_mesh_instance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only says 'Create MeshInstance3D...' and does not disclose side effects beyond creating a node, default sizing behavior, node naming if name is omitted, or whether calling it twice creates duplicates. It does not contradict annotations because none exist.

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?

Single sentence, no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. It earns all 7 words; could be slightly richer without harming conciseness, so not a 5.

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?

The tool is simple enough that parentPath + meshType are sufficient for a basic call, and the schema documents all parameters. Still, there is no output schema and no description of return value, node naming defaults, or per-meshType parameter applicability, leaving moderate ambiguity for an agent choosing optional parameters.

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%, so each property already has a description. The description adds only the 'primitive meshes' concept and does not clarify how size/height/radius map to the six meshType choices, but the schema carries the parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 concrete action ('Create') and a specific Godot node type ('MeshInstance3D'), plus the scope ('primitive meshes'). This distinguishes it from broader sibling tools like game_spawn_node and from game_procedural_mesh, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool versus game_spawn_node, game_procedural_mesh, or game_multimesh. No prerequisites or conditions are described. The intended context must be inferred from the tool name and sibling list.

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