Get one Weeek project

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

While annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, the description adds the error behavior for unknown ids (weeek_get_project failed / weeek_not_found) and confirms the returned object includes the description. This supplements the annotations with valuable operational context, and no contradiction exists.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: the first states the primary function and return shape, the second differentiates from the sibling list tool, and the third gives usage and error guidance. It is front-loaded with 'PRIMARY tool' and wastes no words.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, rich annotations, and sibling context, the description covers purpose, usage, differentiation, and failure mode. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 already describes the single parameter (project_id) with its source and constraints, and schema coverage is 100%. The description reuses this information but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it fetches a single project's full detail by id and lists the exact return fields ({id, title, description, color, isPrivate}). It explicitly distinguishes itself from weeek_list_projects, which returns summaries only, making the scope unambiguous.

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 says 'Use when you already know the project id... and need the description or want to confirm a single project still exists.' It names the alternative (weeek_list_projects) and explains its limitations, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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