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 traits. It says the tool returns the project and linked session IDs, which is useful. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., if the project ID is invalid), permission requirements, or any side effects (though 'get' implies none). This is moderately transparent; a 3 fits.

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 one sentence, concise, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every phrase adds value; no filler. Scores 5.

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 is simple (1 param, no output schema). The description explains both the input (project by id) and the output (project with linked session IDs), which is sufficient for correct use. It does not mention error cases or authentication, but these are not essential for a basic getter. Therefore a 4.

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 fully documents project_id with description 'Project (workspace) ID'. The tool description simply says 'by id' and does not add parameter details beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description adds no extra parameter semantics.

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 states a specific action ('Get') on a specific resource ('a single Harmonica project (workspace) by id') and adds what is included ('including the ids of the sessions linked to it'). This distinguishes it from sibling list_projects (which gets all projects) and get_session.

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 clearly implies the use case: fetch one project by ID. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use, but the contrast with list_projects is evident from 'single' and 'by id'. It provides clear context but no explicit exclusions, so a 4 is appropriate.

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