editor_get_class_signals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a simple listing operation and does not disclose whether inherited signals are included, the expected format of the 'class' parameter, or the structure of the returned data. This is minimal and relies on inference.

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 short sentence that is direct, front-loaded, and wastes no words. It effectively communicates the core purpose with minimal verbosity.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential action but lacks detail on parameter format and expected return. Given the existence of many sibling tools, it does not fully contextualize how this tool fits within the broader set, and the absence of an output schema increases the need for description-level clarity.

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 has one required parameter 'class' with no description (0% coverage). The description's wording 'of a Godot class' clarifies that the parameter refers to a Godot class, but it does not specify whether this is a class name, path, or other identifier. This adds slight meaning beyond the raw schema but leaves room for ambiguity.

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 the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'signals of a Godot class', distinguishing it from sibling tools that list properties or methods. It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like editor_get_method_list or list_all_signals. No prerequisites or context are provided, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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