get_project

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

No annotations are available, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' and does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or how it handles a non-existent project ID. This leaves the agent uncertain about important behavioral traits.

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 with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core action and resource, making it appropriately concise for a simple get 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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but sparse. It does not describe the return format or error behavior, and with no annotations, contextual information is minimal. However, for a basic get operation, the description covers the essential purpose.

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 input schema fully describes the only parameter (project_id) with clear meaning, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, but since the schema already provides the necessary semantics, the baseline score applies.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'details of a specific project', clearly indicating a retrieval operation for one project. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_projects (which lists all) and mutation tools such as create_project or update_project.

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 this is used when a single project's details are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like list_projects or get_task. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, so usage guidance is solely implicit.

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