project_switch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does not say whether the switch is session-scoped or persistent, whether it changes state for subsequent tool calls, what happens if the ID is invalid, or whether it requires the project to exist. 'Active project workspace' implies global mutable state but the consequences of invoking it are not disclosed.

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?

A single short sentence with the action and object front-loaded and no wasted words. Its terseness is efficient but edges into under-specification rather than tightness.

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 state-mutating switch with no annotations, no output schema, and no return-value information, the description omits the essentials an agent needs: persistence of the switch, error behavior on an unknown projectId, and any permission requirement. The tool is simple, but the gaps are the ones that affect correct invocation.

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 single parameter already documents itself as the database ID of the target project. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: switching the active project workspace. An agent can distinguish it from project_list or project_delete, though the description never names the closely related env_switch, so it does not explicitly route between the two switch tools.

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?

No guidance on when to switch versus when to read (project_list) or how this differs from env_switch, which appears in the sibling list. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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