Select the current app

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

The description claims the tool sets session state and persists across calls, implying mutation. However, annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, which contradicts this. Per guidelines, description contradicts annotations, so score is 1 and annotation_contradiction is true.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and behavior, then return value and usage context, ending with an edge case. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

Description covers purpose, behavior, return value, prerequisites, and edge cases. No output schema exists, but return format is described. The annotation contradiction creates some confusion, but the description itself is complete for an agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter. Description adds meaning by specifying the source ('copied from list_projects') and providing an example ID format. This goes beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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 sets the current app/project for the conversation, using verbs 'Set' and 'defaults'. It distinguishes from sibling list_projects by explaining it selects rather than lists. Sibling context confirms uniqueness.

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 states when to use ('switch to <app>'), prerequisite ('call list_projects first'), and an edge case ('No effect with a single-app key'). Provides complete usage guidance.

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