create_project_from_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only indicates a mutation (create) but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, reversibility, or any constraints. The description is too brief to inform the agent of essential behavioral details.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices substance for brevity; while not verbose, it could be expanded without becoming excessive.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and minimal description, the tool is severely underdocumented. A creation tool should explain return values, default behavior, and validation constraints. The description fails to provide enough context for correct usage.

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 0% description coverage, yet the description adds minimal semantics beyond the parameter names ('plan_id', 'template_id'). It does not explain what valid values are or how they relate, leaving the agent guessing about the template's role.

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 'Create a new project on a plan from a project template' clearly states the action (create), the resource (project), and the context (on a plan from a template). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_projects or get_plan_projects, though it does not specify the nature of the template.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. Sibling tools include other creation tools like create_todo, but no exclusions or context are given.

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