get_project_info

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

No annotations provided, so description must shoulder full burden. It only says 'associated files' without specifying what that entails or any side effects. For a read-like operation, more detail on safety would be beneficial.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, but could benefit from structure (e.g., bullet points of info returned) for easier parsing. However, it is appropriately concise.

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 no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain what 'associated files' are, return format, error conditions, or any additional context needed for a simple tool.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage for 'project' parameter. Description adds that it accepts a .kicad_pro path or directory, providing meaningful context not present in schema.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves info for a project, specifying input as .kicad_pro path or directory, and output as associated files. Distinguishes from siblings like get_board_info or list_projects.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites or when not to use among many info tools in sibling list.

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