get_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral context. 'Get detailed information' implies a read-only operation but does not disclose any specifics such as required permissions, error behavior for missing IDs, or what fields are included in the response. The description is minimal and relies on the inherent meaning of 'Get'.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse at a glance.

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 has no output schema, so the description should clarify what 'detailed information' includes or what the return structure looks like. It fails to do so, leaving the agent uncertain about the response format. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is a notable gap.

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 schema provides a single parameter 'id' with a clear description ('The project UUID'), giving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score 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 the verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'project', clearly indicating it retrieves information for a single project. It is implicitly distinct from list_projects (which lists all projects) and from project-specific tools like get_project_board, though it does not explicitly name these alternatives.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The context implies it is for retrieving a specific project by ID, but the description lacks exclusions or references to sibling tools such as list_projects or get_project_board.

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