get_project_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb 'Get' plus the read-only nature of a 0-param info getter makes the safety profile obvious, and 'currently loaded' is a meaningful behavioral qualifier. It still does not say what happens if no project is loaded and discloses nothing about the returned data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Nothing is repeated and nothing wastes the agent's attention.

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 simple 0-param reader this is close to adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description never hints at what fields the 'information' contains (project name, path, version, etc.) or the failure mode when nothing is loaded. Those are the remaining gaps for an otherwise complete definition.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. No parameter-related information is missing.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('information about the currently loaded RPG Maker MZ project'), which is concrete and unambiguous. It does not, however, differentiate itself from siblings like list_resources or list_entities, which also surface project-derived 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 phrase 'currently loaded' implies the prerequisite that a project must first be loaded (presumably via load_project), which is useful implicit guidance. Beyond that, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance or named alternative, so usage is only inferred.

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