create_project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about persistence, whether an existing project with the same name is rejected or overwritten, required permissions, or side effects.

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?

One sentence with no redundancy, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded beyond the already-obvious purpose.

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?

A mutation tool with zero annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage needs far more description. As written, an agent cannot predict the return value, error conditions, or the effect of a duplicate name.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single required 'name' parameter. The description does not clarify whether the name is a display name, a unique identifier, or whether it must be unique — leaving the only parameter's semantics undefined.

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 restates the tool name almost verbatim ('Create a new project' for create_project), adding no scope, target system, or object type. It does not distinguish this from save_project or create_timeline among the siblings.

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?

No indication of when to use this versus save_project, load_project, or list_projects. The agent must infer that this creates a brand-new persisted project rather than saving an in-memory state.

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