create_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It does disclose the 'does not exist' condition, which is useful, but it fails to mention what happens when the directory already exists (e.g., error, no-op) or whether it creates intermediate directories. This leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the action.

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?

For a simple creation tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. The main gap is the ambiguous handling of an existing directory, but overall it provides adequate context for an agent to select and invoke the 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?

The input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (100% schema coverage), so the description adds no extra meaning beyond referencing the directory and name. The baseline of 3 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 a specific verb 'Create' with a clear resource 'GameMaker YYP project' and a condition ('if it does not exist'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_sprite_from_images, which operate on existing 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?

The description implies it is for creating new projects and the 'if it does not exist' condition gives some context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or what happens if the directory already exists. Sibling tools are not referenced.

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