create_shader_include

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

The description is extremely sparse and doesn't disclose any behavioral traits beyond the action of creating a file. With no annotations, the agent has no information about overwrite behavior, directory creation, or file content, leaving significant safety gaps for a mutation tool.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and contains no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a tool with this simplicity.

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 description is minimal and doesn't cover important context such as whether the file is created empty, whether existing files are overwritten, or if parent directories are created. For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is insufficient.

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 schema fully describes the path parameter with an example. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a .gdshaderinc file, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_shader and read_shader_include by explicitly naming the file type.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It doesn't mention scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent must infer from the name alone.

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