resolve_create_project

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

Beyond annotations (all false), the description reveals that the tool creates and opens a project and optionally applies settings. However, it does not clarify what 'allowlisted' means or disclose side effects like overwriting or conflict handling.

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?

A single sentence that succinctly conveys the core action without extraneous words. Well front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description omits important context such as behavior when a project already exists, what 'allowlisted' settings are, and prerequisites. Adequate for a simple tool but lacking for its complexity (5 parameters, nuanced behaviors).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only hints at the 'settings' parameter via 'optionally applying allowlisted timeline/color settings'. It does not explain 'name', 'media_location', 'reuse_existing', or 'idempotency_key', leaving most parameters ambiguous.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Create and open' and resource 'project', distinguishing it from sibling tools like resolve_open_project. Mentions optional settings, which adds specificity.

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?

Implies usage for creating and opening projects, and the optional settings hint at customization, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use versus alternatives like resolve_open_project.

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