get_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and describes the error behavior when the id is missing, adding useful operational context beyond the property schema.

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?

Four short sentences cover purpose, usage sequence, error behavior, and sibling differentiation with no filler. The key scoping detail is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 simple read-only tool with one well-documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it returns, when to call it, what happens on missing ids, and which sibling to use instead. Nothing critical is left unstated.

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 100%, and the schema already explains that project_id is 'Project id returned by list_projects.' The description reinforces this with 'Use after list_projects', but does not add substantial new meaning beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get one project by id', and clarifies the payload includes 'currently open Needs'. It also distinguishes itself from get_need, which retrieves a single Need plus receipts, so an agent can tell siblings apart.

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 gives explicit sequencing guidance ('Use after list_projects') and states when to prefer get_need instead of parsing this payload. This directly helps an agent choose between this tool and its closest sibling.

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