Godette

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive behavior ('Delete addons/godette/') and the purpose ('re-scaffold'), but lacks details on permissions needed, potential side effects, or error handling. The description is informative but could be more comprehensive for a tool with destructive actions.

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 front-loaded with the core action and purpose in a single, efficient sentence. Every word adds value, with no redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive action with no parameters) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does and when to use it, but could benefit from additional behavioral details like confirmation prompts or rollback options to enhance completeness.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's purpose and usage context, which aligns with the baseline expectation for zero-parameter tools.

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 states the specific action ('Delete addons/godette/ and re-scaffold the GDScript plugin files') and the resource involved ('from current templates'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on plugin scaffolding rather than general file operations or node management.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('after changing onboarding templates'), which helps guide usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools, such as create_file or replace_content.

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