editor_instantiate_scene

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral implications, but it only states the action. It does not mention side effects on the current scene, whether the scene must be already loaded, resource ownership, or if the operation is reversible. This is a significant gap 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 concise sentence that immediately states the core action. It has no fluff or repetition, but is perhaps too terse to cover important details. It is well-structured for readability.

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 has three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain parameter meanings, return values, side effects, or usage context, which are necessary for safe and correct invocation.

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 only 33% (only 'scene' has a description). The description text does not explain the 'name' or 'parent' parameters, leaving their semantics undocumented. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'Instantiate a PackedScene into the current scene' uses a specific verb (Instantiate) and resource (PackedScene) with a clear target (current scene). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_scene or edit_scene, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_scene or editor_add_node. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context provided to help an agent choose this tool appropriately.

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