physics

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

The description adds a key behavioral trait: operations are runtime-only and do not persist, with a pointer to .tscn editing for persistence. Annotations are all false, so this context is valuable. However, it doesn't detail specific side effects or error behavior.

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 paragraph that front-loads the tool's purpose and enumerates operations in a compact list. It's concise, with no redundant filler, and the runtime/persistence note is useful. Not perfectly structured but efficient.

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 tool with five actions and no output schema, the description provides a high-level summary of each action's behavior, including specifics like diagnose containing speed/contact points/collision shapes. It also clarifies runtime-only behavior. It doesn't detail return formats or errors, but it's reasonably complete.

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?

The input schema already describes all 12 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds a natural-language summary of actions but doesn't provide parameter details beyond what the schema already contains. 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?

The description clearly identifies it as a unified physics system tool and enumerates five specific operations (raycast, body_info, diagnose, query_spatial, collision_overlay), each with a brief Chinese summary. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, though the scope is evident.

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?

It states '运行时操作，仅影响当前执行上下文' (runtime operations, only affect current execution context) and '如需持久化，请编辑 .tscn 文件' (for persistence, edit .tscn). This provides clear context for when to use the tool and when not to, though it doesn't name alternative tools.

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