get_project_context

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

Clearly states 'never mutates, never touches the network' and that it is a read-only lookup. No annotations provided, so the description fully discloses 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 well-structured and front-loaded, but slightly verbose with multiple sentences. However, every sentence adds value, so it remains effective.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the returned fields. It covers all three parameter scenarios (projectId, name, none) and gives context on why this tool is preferred over alternatives. Complete for a simple read tool.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how to use projectId for exact lookup, name for display name lookup, and no arguments to list all projects. Schema coverage is 100%, but description enhances utility.

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 is for read-only lookup of a project's context, listing specific fields (name, URLs, brand context, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like configure_project which mutates.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this whenever you only need to inspect' and contrasts with configure_project. Provides specific advice for the Pincushion AI critic subagent and explains parameter usage for different lookup scenarios.

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