Switch project

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

The description discloses behavioral side effects beyond annotations: subsequent jobs are filed under this name, outputs without explicit paths land in the project's directory, and list_jobs filters by default. Since annotations are minimal, this fully carries the transparency burden.

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, purpose first, then effects, then a concrete usage scenario. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy.

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 single-parameter state-setting tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, side effects, and setup requirements fully. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema fully describes the name parameter with allowed characters. The description adds that the name is created on first use, which is useful context over the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3, and the added context raises it to 4.

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 'Work under a named project' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like list_projects by explaining the effect on subsequent jobs and list_jobs filtering.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Two sessions editing different videos should each set their own project' and it notes the name is created on first use, so no setup is needed. This gives clear context for when to use the tool.

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