project_add

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

The description mentions it detects if the project already has agentic infrastructure, but it does not explain what happens in that case, whether it modifies agentic.toml, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and falls short.

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 sentence that front-loads the main action and includes a useful parenthetical nuance. It wastes no words, but it is perhaps too terse for a tool with 7 parameters. Still, the structure is clean and direct.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter descriptions mean this description is woefully incomplete. For a tool with 7 parameters, an agent cannot determine return values, required fields beyond 'name', or side effects solely from this description.

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?

There are 7 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention any of them. It gives no clues about what 'path', 'type', 'preset', 'status', or other parameters mean, making correct invocation nearly impossible.

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 the tool's function: 'Registra un proyecto en agentic.toml' (registers a project in agentic.toml), using a specific verb and resource. It also hints at a detection feature. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like init_project, which could also involve project setup.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as init_project or project_remove. It does not mention prerequisites, ideal use cases, or situations where another tool would be more appropriate.

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