create-project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the Enterprise license requirement and the JSON formatting need, but omits safety aspects, side effects, return behavior, and idempotency. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's impact.

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 concise with only two sentences, using 'NOTE:' and 'IMPORTANT:' to highlight key points. Slightly more detail on return values could improve completeness without adding bulk.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, the description should include what the tool returns or any side effects. It also lacks lifecycle context (e.g., relationship to delete-project or update-project). The provided information is minimal for an agent to use the tool confidently.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that 'clientId' originates from 'init-n8n' and imposes a required JSON formatting style, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 'Create a new project in n8n', a specific verb-resource pair. While the name itself differentiates from sibling create tools, the description does not explicitly distinguish it from other create operations like create-workflow or create-user, but it adds context about Enterprise license requirement.

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?

Provides clear prerequisites (Enterprise license) and a formatting constraint (single-line JSON). However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like update-project or init-n8n, and lacks any 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.