Open project

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

Annotations provide openWorldHint=true, but description adds value by noting dialogs are suppressed and file must exist. For a simple open tool, this is sufficient behavioral insight beyond the annotation.

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?

Two concise sentences convey all necessary information without waste. Every word earns its place.

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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, no output schema) and the presence of a clear annotation, the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: purpose, precondition, and behavioral quirk.

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 100% and the schema description already fully defines the path parameter. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action (open), resource (.prproj project), and tool (Premiere). It includes key details like dialog suppression and file existence requirement, distinguishing it from siblings like new_project or close_project.

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 preconditions (file must exist) and behavioral notes (dialogs suppressed), giving clear context for usage. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, the purpose is straightforward and well-defined.

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