Get project

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds the scoping constraint of looking up by ID or name, but does not disclose what is returned (e.g., full project object) or error behavior on not found. It provides minimal additional context beyond annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence ('Return one SuperDev project by ID or name.') with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool.

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, the description provides sufficient context for a basic get-by-identifier operation. It lacks output schema and does not mention return format or error behavior, but for a read-only simple getter, the description is reasonably complete and consistent with the annotation.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description clarifies that project_id and project_name serve as lookup keys. However, it does not specify that exactly one is required, whether they are mutually exclusive, or what happens if both are provided, leaving some ambiguity for a schema with zero required 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 returns a single SuperDev project by ID or name, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('SuperDev project'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_projects (which lists all projects) and get_project_config (which retrieves configuration).

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 when you have an identifier (ID or name) and need a project, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. No reference to sibling tools like list_projects or get_project_config is provided.

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