lokalise_create_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that the tool initializes a project and returns a Project ID and access details. This is non-destructive creation, but no additional behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, required permissions) are given. Adequate but not rich.

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 three sentences: first covers purpose and parameters, second specifies usage context, third notes returns and next steps. It is concise and front-loaded with essential information, with no unnecessary words.

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's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, parameters, usage context, and return value. It omits details about the return format but mentions 'Project ID and access details,' which is sufficient for an agent. It also provides next steps, enhancing completeness.

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% with descriptive schema for each parameter. The description mentions name (required), description and base_lang_iso (optional, default 'en'), but omits the 'languages' array parameter. It adds minimal value beyond the schema, as the schema already provides clear 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 it initializes a new localization project, specifies required and optional parameters, and mentions use cases like starting localization for new products or creating test environments. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update, delete, or add languages.

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 says 'Use when starting localization for new products or creating test environments.' It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the mention of 'next steps' implies alternatives like adding languages or keys later. Sibling tools exist for updating, so the context is clear enough.

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