check_project

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

Describes the tool as read-only, not mutating keyring or audit log beyond a 'list' read, and mentions the error condition for missing manifest.

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 informative but slightly verbose. It front-loads the purpose and contains useful details, though minor trimming could improve conciseness.

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 one parameter and no annotations, the description covers return format, readiness condition, error handling, and read-only nature, making it fully adequate for the tool's complexity.

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% with a clear description of the single parameter. The description adds context about defaulting to CWD, but does not significantly enhance 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 compares keys in the project's .q-ring.json manifest against the keyring, serving as a readiness gate. It uses specific verbs and differentiates from siblings like health_check and agent_scan.

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 specifies when to use (before dev server, deploying, onboarding) and when not to use, directing to alternative tools for different scopes.

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