get_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation via 'Obtenir' and adds that tasks are included, but it does not disclose return format, error behavior, or whether task details are nested or complete. Some useful context is present, but significant gaps remain.

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 French sentence with no filler or repeated information. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter and no output schema. The description sufficiently states that it returns project details and tasks, which is enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly. However, 'details' remains somewhat vague, and the exact return structure is unspecified, preventing a perfect score.

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 has a single parameter 'id' with 100% schema description coverage ('ID du projet'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, so 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 'Obtenir' and names the resource 'un projet' along with its tasks, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_projects. It precisely communicates what the tool retrieves.

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 the tool is used when needing details of a single project and its tasks, but it does not explicitly contrast with list_projects or other alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. Usage context is only implicit through the purpose statement.

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