get_project_info

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the requirement for an external extension and implies read-only behavior by describing 'get' rather than 'modify'. No destructive actions are suggested, and the behavior is straightforward.

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 two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the core purpose and the second adding an essential prerequisite. No verbose or irrelevant content.

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 tool has no input parameters or output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and returns (filename and top-level element summary) plus a critical dependency. It could note that it is read-only, but this is implied.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed; the tool takes no inputs.

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 explicitly states it retrieves the current StarUML project's filename and top-level element summary, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that handle diagrams, commands, or file operations.

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 mentions a prerequisite (staruml-mcp-extension must be installed), providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the sibling tool names imply distinct purposes.

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