boj_gitlab_get_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get a GitLab project' but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation, what data is returned, error handling, authentication needs, or rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with just four words, front-loading the core purpose without any wasted text. It efficiently communicates the essential action and resource, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'get' returns (e.g., project details, metadata), error conditions, or how it differs from sibling tools, leaving the AI agent with inadequate context for effective use.

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 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'project_id' documented as 'Project ID or URL-encoded path'. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond this, so it meets the baseline score of 3 where the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('a GitLab project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'boj_gitlab_list_projects' or specify what 'get' entails (e.g., retrieving metadata vs. full project data).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'boj_gitlab_list_projects' for listing multiple projects or other GitLab tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing a specific project ID, or when this tool is appropriate.

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