project_open

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

The description discloses that unsaved changes are kept, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it doesn't clarify whether the current project remains open or is closed, nor does it address error handling (e.g., if the project doesn't exist).

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?

Two concise sentences, each adding information. No unnecessary words, though more detail could be added without harming brevity.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description covers the basic action and one behavioral aspect. However, it omits details about the current project's state (open/closed) and any preconditions (e.g., must already have a list of projects).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only repeats that the tool opens by name, adding no additional meaning like format, path, or case sensitivity.

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 tool opens an existing project by name, distinguishing it from project_create, project_close, and other project management tools in the sibling list.

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?

While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the purpose is clear: use this to open an existing project. The mention of keeping unsaved changes provides helpful context for when to use it.

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