redmine_create_project

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

With no annotations, the description only states it returns the project and is stable. It omits critical behavioral details like auth requirements, side effects, error handling, or whether it's idempotent.

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 (one sentence) but lacks substance. The '[Stable]' prefix is helpful, but the structure could be improved with clearer separation of purpose and behavior.

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 output schema, no annotations, and 0% parameter coverage, the description fails to provide enough context for correct tool use. It doesn't explain return structure, error conditions, or parameter details.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation for any of the 5 parameters (2 required). The agent must guess the meaning of fields like 'inherit_members' or 'is_public'.

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 'Create a new Redmine project' with a verb and resource, and mentions it returns the created project. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like redmine_update_project, which share similar context.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios to avoid. The description is purely declarative without usage context.

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