open_create_project_ui

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

Annotations are all false and provide no safety cues. The description only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., whether the Hub must be running, if it brings the window to focus, or if it fails silently when the Hub is closed). For a UI- opening tool, more behavioral context is needed.

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, short sentence that conveys the essential information with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and a simple action, the description is reasonably complete. However, it could mention that this is a deep-link action targeting the Hub (already present) and perhaps specify that the Hub should be running or that it will open the default browser or Hub window.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter info because none exist.

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 action ('opens') and the specific resource ('Neues Projekt'-Oberfläche im Hub). It distinguishes from siblings like 'open_project' or 'open_package_install_ui', which target different interfaces.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: use when you need to create a new project via the Hub UI. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, such as using 'open_deep_link' for generic deep links or ensuring the Hub is running.

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