get_default_project_dir

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying that the result comes from 'projectDir.json', providing source context beyond the annotation. No additional behavioral traits are needed for such a simple tool.

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 sentence that is well-structured and front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word is necessary, and there is no wasted 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?

Given the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and annotations adequately cover the safe read behavior, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool returns and from where.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 according to the rubric. The description does not need to add parameter meaning, as there are none.

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 'Returns the default folder for new projects (projectDir.json)', using a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('default folder for new projects'). Among siblings, there is a counterpart 'set_default_project_dir', which distinguishes this as the getter.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While the purpose implies usage when the default project directory is needed, no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. This is adequate for a simple getter, but lacks deeper context.

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