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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent write operation. The description adds that it creates a public listing (warning the agent of visibility) and specifies constraints for hero_image_url (must be public http(s) URL). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. The purpose and critical usage warning are front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main functionality, critical pre-conditions, and a key parameter constraint. It lacks details about the return value or success/failure behavior, but the essentials for invocation are present.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by emphasizing the need for user confirmation on the required parameters and explaining the hero_image_url constraint in detail, including a workaround for local files. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 publishes a new project under the user's account. It specifies the action ('Publish') and resource ('project'), and the IMPORTANT note distinguishes this as a creation tool from sibling tools like 'get_project' or 'list_projects'.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to confirm title, pitch, url, and category with the user before posting, emphasizing the public nature of the listing. It also advises using the CLI for local images, providing clear context. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the sibling context offers alternatives.

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