link_claude_desktop

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

The description discloses behavioral differences based on the write_config parameter: writing to config or returning instructions. This adds transparency beyond the input schema, but it does not mention permissions or potential side effects.

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 concise and well-structured, starting with the purpose followed by parameter details. It is efficient with no extraneous content, though slightly verbose in the Args format.

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?

The description covers the main action and parameter behavior adequately. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., project existence) and does not detail the output or potential overwriting, leaving minor gaps.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: project_id as 'The Metis project ID to register' and write_config with its conditional behavior. This provides clear, essential semantics.

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 tool's purpose: 'Register a Metis project in Claude Desktop's project list.' The verb 'register' is specific, and the resource and target are well-defined, leaving no ambiguity about the action.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose implies its use case, but the description lacks context such as prerequisites or exclusions.

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