Get Project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. Description adds that it retrieves details, but no extra behavioral context (e.g., no mention of response format or potential errors). With annotations carrying the burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 with no extraneous information. Front-loaded, efficient, and to the point.

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 output schema exists (not shown but indicated), and annotations cover safety, the description is complete enough for a single-project retrieval tool. No gaps.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (project_key with example, response_format with enum and default). Description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3.

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?

Description states 'Get details of a specific Bitbucket project by its key.' Uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('project') and the identifier ('key'). Distinguishes from sibling 'bitbucket_get_projects' which retrieves multiple 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. The description is sufficient but lacks explicit context like 'Use this to retrieve a single project; for multiple projects use get_projects.' Nonetheless, it's not misleading.

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