get_or_create_project

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the conditional find-or-create behavior, but does not disclose error conditions, permission requirements, or behavior when the project exists in another org.

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 short and includes a structured 'Args' section. It is front-loaded with the main behavior. A slightly more structured format could improve readability, but it is concise and effective.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and parameter meaning. However, it lacks details about the return value format and error handling, which would be valuable for completeness.

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 0%, but the description adds value by explaining each parameter's purpose and noting that org_id comes from 'list_organizations'. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 ('find or create') and resource ('project'), clearly stating the idempotent behavior. It distinguishes from 'create_project' (only creates) and 'lookup_project' (only finds).

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 provides some guidance by hinting that org_id should come from 'list_organizations', but lacks explicit comparison to sibling tools like 'create_project' or 'lookup_project', and does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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