as_project_info

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. Description adds the 'without building' context, consistent with annotations. No additional behavioral details beyond what annotations provide.

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 plus Args/Returns. Front-loaded with core action. Every sentence adds value: purpose, source files, data extracted, and return format. No redundant text.

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?

Annotations cover safety, output schema exists (though not shown), description lists returned fields. Lacks error conditions or prerequisites, but for a read-only tool this is adequate. Slight gap in differentiating from sibling as_apk_info.

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 0% because the parameter description is minimal. The description only restates 'project_dir' without adding meaning beyond the schema's own description. Does not compensate for low coverage.

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?

Clear verb 'extract metadata' with specific resource 'Android project without building'. Lists concrete data items (modules, applicationId, etc.) and distinguishes from build tools by stating 'without building it'.

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 the tool reads project metadata without building, implying it's for non-build introspection. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear given sibling tools like as_apk_info and as_gradle_assemble.

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