load_project_status

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It explains the 'source' field meanings, details return value (JSON string including source), and implies a read-only operation. No hidden behaviors or contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with a clear intro, detailed paragraphs for source field and imported projects, and explicit Args/Returns sections. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 output schema exists, the description appropriately summarizes the return value. It covers purpose, parameter, and special usage instructions for imported projects, making it complete for this tool's complexity.

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%, so description must compensate. It adds an 'Args' section but only says 'project_id: Project ID', which is minimal. The parameter meaning is clear from context, but the description does not add much beyond the schema's title.

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 clearly states it loads project status and metadata, listing specific items (topic, slide count, completion status). It distinguishes between generated and imported projects, providing unique value beyond the tool name.

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?

Description provides explicit context for when to use: to check status before further operations. It gives specific instructions for imported projects to skip outline steps and use other tools, helping the agent decide when not to use this tool.

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