muse_project_profile

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

The description uses the vague verb 'manages' and emphasizes 'save', which underrepresents the full range of actions (create, get, update, delete, list, setActive, getActive, clone). With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure but remains incomplete and somewhat misleading.

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 concise: two sentences that avoid fluff and front-load the purpose. However, it is so brief that it omits important aspects of the tool's functionality. For a tool with 19 parameters, this brevity borders on under-specification.

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's complexity (19 parameters, nested objects, multiple actions, no output schema), the description is too minimal. It does not explain the profile lifecycle, the significance of actions like setActive/getActive, or how profiles integrate with other tools. The description leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'documentation, code analysis, and publishing' which aligns with schema parameters, but adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not enhance understanding of parameter relationships or constraints.

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 manages project profiles for vibe coding sessions, specifying the domains (documentation, code analysis, publishing). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like muse_analyze_code or muse_publish_document, which operate on profiles rather than managing them.

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 description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that profiles are prerequisites for other tools, nor does it explain when to create, get, update, or list. Context is implied but missing direct usage instructions.

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