xero_get_project

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, or side effects. The reference to routing is purely technical and not behavioral. The agent cannot infer safety or authorization needs.

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 brief with only three lines. However, it is not well-structured; the first line is redundant with the tool name. Despite the brevity, every sentence adds some information, but the overall structure could be improved.

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's simplicity (one parameter), the description is still incomplete. The agent lacks information about what constitutes valid arguments, the expected output beyond the output schema, and how this tool fits with siblings. The description does not sufficiently equip the agent 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?

The single parameter 'arguments' is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation', which adds minimal meaning beyond the schema type. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by detailing the expected structure, but it does not. The agent is left guessing what keys to include.

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 merely restates the tool name as 'get_project' and labels it as a Xero connector operation. It does not elaborate on what exactly is retrieved or provide any differentiation from sibling tools like xero_list_projects. The purpose is vaguely clear but not enriched.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., xero_list_projects for listing all projects). The description lacks any context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusion criteria.

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