retrieve_project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent. Description adds that it returns a 'Project object'. No additional behavioral details like error handling or auth needs are provided, but for a simple read operation this is adequate.

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 brief and structured with an Args section. However, the Args section contains a parameter not in the schema, making it technically inaccurate. Could be improved by removing workspace_slug. As is, it's still relatively 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?

Output schema exists so return details are not needed. However, the inconsistency in parameters (workspace_slug) creates confusion. No mention of error cases or edge cases. For a retrieval tool, it should at least match the schema accurately.

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 0% so description must compensate. It adds that project_id is a UUID, which is helpful. However, it also lists workspace_slug as an argument which is not in the schema, introducing false information. This undermines reliability.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'project by ID' clearly state the tool's purpose. However, the description mentions 'workspace_slug' which is not in the input schema, causing slight confusion. Among siblings like list_projects and update_project, this tool is clearly for single entity retrieval.

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 use this tool vs alternatives. Does not specify that it returns a full project object or that it is idempotent. Missing context about when to prefer this over list_projects or search tools.

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