get_project_info

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the action. It implies read-only access, but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., a project must be open) or error conditions. For a parameterless tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no wasted words. All information is presented efficiently.

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?

No output schema, but description lists three return fields (name, path, sequences). For a simple info retrieval tool, this covers the main use case. Lacks details on edge cases or error handling, but acceptable given simplicity.

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?

No parameters exist (0 params, 100% schema coverage). Description does not need to add param info; baseline score of 4 is appropriate for a tool with no parameters.

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 retrieves info about the currently open Premiere Pro project, listing specific fields (name, path, sequences). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_markers or get_timeline_items which return different data.

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 implies usage by stating 'currently open project', but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or specify when not to use. Since it's a simple info tool, the context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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