game_remove_node

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is destructive through 'remove and free,' but it does not mention important side effects such as whether child nodes are also freed, behavior on invalid paths, or prerequisites before deletion.

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. It states the core action immediately and every word contributes necessary meaning.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits operational details that would help an agent avoid errors, such as expected NodePath syntax, whether the freed node's children are also freed, and what happens if the provided path does not exist.

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% and the only parameter, nodePath, is already described as 'Path to the node to remove.' The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Remove and free a node from the running game's scene tree.' It clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from editor-scene operations like remove_scene_node, though it does not explicitly name sibling 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?

The phrase 'running game's scene tree' implies this is for live runtime manipulation rather than editing scene files. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no direct comparison to alternatives such as remove_scene_node or game_reparent_node.

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