Get Nirvana Project

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

No annotations are provided so the description carries full burden. It discloses the key behavior: returns a project with direct children. It could mention if there are any side effects or limitations, but for a read tool it is adequately transparent.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second gives usage guidance. Well front-loaded and efficient.

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, no output schema, and sibling tools, the description is fairly complete. It covers what, how to identify, and a prerequisite. A description of the response structure would be beneficial but is not critical.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that id is a UUID and name is a string, and that exactly one must be provided, adding valuable semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 returns a single project and its direct child items, which distinguishes it from sibling get_ tools that return filtered views, and from list_projects which lists all projects.

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?

It explicitly instructs to identify by exact id or name, provide exactly one, and suggests using list_projects first to discover names, providing clear usage context and an alternative.

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