_mcp_create_project_structure

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

The description states it initializes a directory tree and project.json, implying file creation. However, without annotations, it does not disclose whether it overwrites existing files, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. The transparency is basic but incomplete.

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 a single, concise sentence. It contains no extraneous information and communicates the core action efficiently.

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 has an output schema (not shown) and is relatively simple, the description covers the basic action. However, it lacks parameter explanations and usage context, making it less complete for an agent that needs to know how to use parameters 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 input schema has two required parameters (project_id, client_name) with no descriptions in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description does not explain what these parameters represent or their expected format (e.g., project ID format, client name restrictions). Thus, the description adds no value 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 clearly states the tool initializes a project directory tree and project.json. The verb 'initialise' and specific resources 'project directory tree' and 'project.json' make the purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like _mcp_onboard_client or _mcp_load_project_template which handle different aspects of project setup.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as whether a workspace must be empty, or when it should be run relative to other tools. The description provides no context for proper usage.

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