blockbench_get_project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It indicates a non-destructive read ('Read a compact snapshot') and lists returned elements, but does not detail limitations, permission requirements, or whether repeated calls produce consistent results. The 'compact' qualifier suggests a subset, which is helpful but not fully transparent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and lists contents. No wasted words; every clause serves a purpose.

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 an unexplained parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits how the parameter affects output and the exact structure of the snapshot. For a read operation, details about pagination or format are missing, leaving the agent to infer from tool name only.

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 tool has one parameter 'include_uv' but the description provides zero explanation of what it does. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema's default value. The AI agent has no guidance on when to set it to true.

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 the verb 'Read' and the resource 'compact snapshot of the open Blockbench project', listing specific contents (groups, cubes, textures, animations, bounds). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like blockbench_open_project or blockbench_save_project, which have different purposes.

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 implies this tool is for reading project state, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus other read-like tools (e.g., blockbench_status). No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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