launch_editor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action without explaining side effects, blocking behavior, failure modes, or whether the editor launches in the background. This is a notable gap for a tool that spawns an external process.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately concise for such a simple tool, though it could have added a few behavioral details without becoming bloated.

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 has low complexity with one required parameter fully covered by the schema, so the description is minimally adequate for invocation. However, it lacks information about the execution model, return behavior, and prerequisites, leaving the agent to guess about what happens after launch.

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 single parameter 'projectPath' is already described as 'Godot project path'. The description's phrase 'for a specific project' adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 specific verb ('launch'), a clear resource ('Godot editor'), and a targeting condition ('for a specific project'). Clearly distinguishable from siblings like run_project and create_project, which serve different intents.

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 implies use when the user wants to open the Godot editor for a specific project, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. No exclusionary guidance is provided.

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