Create a new project in the anonymous session
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The display name of the project | |
| slug | Yes | The URL slug for the project (used in URLs) | |
| is_public | No | Whether the project is public or private | |
| session_id | Yes | The anonymous session ID | |
| overview_content | No | Markdown content for the project overview |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action of creating a project, with no details on required context (session must exist), side effects, or return values. This is insufficient 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 with no wasted words. It conveys the core purpose efficiently, though it omits details that could help context. Still, it is appropriately concise.
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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal and doesn't explain the 'anonymous session' context or any workflow. It relies entirely on the schema for parameter details, but lacks operational context like when the session must be created first. This is incomplete.
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 provides 100% coverage for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, but since the schema is thorough, the lack of description-level parameter info does not hurt.
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 'create' and identifies the resource 'project', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_session and delete_project. The qualifier 'in the anonymous session' adds useful context about the scope.
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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing an existing session. It merely states the action without exclusions or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct, targeting specific resources (projects, data sources, tools) and actions (add, create, delete, update). Slight overlap exists between toggle_tool and update_tool, and between add_data_source and add_tool, but descriptions clarify the differences.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case, such as add_data_source, create_project, delete_tool, and reorder_steps. No mixing of conventions or vague verbs.
13 tools is within the ideal range for a project management server. Each tool serves a clear purpose in managing projects, data sources, tools, and sessions, without unnecessary redundancy.
Core CRUD operations are covered for projects and tools, with additional operations like reorder and toggle. Minor gaps exist: data sources lack an update operation, and there's no explicit list/get for tools or data sources, but project details likely cover this.
