gsd_new_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It only says 'Initialize' and 'run once per project', without explaining what files, configs, or state changes occur, whether re-running is safe, or what prerequisites are needed. This is a minimal behavioral hint at best.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. There is no filler or redundant information, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what initialization entails and any important side effects. It only provides purpose and a run-once constraint, leaving gaps around what actually happens when the tool is invoked and what the agent should expect afterward. For a state-changing tool, this is incomplete.

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 schema fully documents both parameters (name and optional description), so the description does not need to add much. However, it adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Initialize a new GSD project'), making the action unambiguous. The parenthetical 'run once per project' adds lifecycle context that distinguishes this project-level tool from sibling tools like gsd_new_milestone or gsd_add_phase.

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?

The phrase 'run once per project' provides clear context that this tool is meant for the initial setup of a project. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the once-per-project lifecycle guidance is a clear usage signal.

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