Create Project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, giving the safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond 'at the specified path,' which is already in the schema. No details on overwrite behavior, error conditions, or whether existing files are affected.

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 efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it is so minimal that it does not front-load any additional useful context, which keeps it from a 5.

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 simple one-parameter create tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete. It omits any mention of failure modes (e.g., path already exists) or relationship to project saving/opening, which an agent might need for correct invocation.

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 parameter 'path' is fully described in the schema as the full file path for the new .prproj file. The description merely restates this without adding format or constraint details, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('a new Premiere Pro project') with the path parameter. It clearly conveys the action, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like create_project_backup or open_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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as open_project or save_project_as. It only describes what the tool does, not when it is appropriate.

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