Save the project

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive (destructiveHint=true), and the description complements them by disclosing the stateful behavior that path becomes optional only after an initial save. It does not fully spell out overwrite semantics, but the destructive hint covers that risk.

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 short clauses front-load the core action and add only the one operational caveat. There is no filler, redundant framing, or unnecessary repetition.

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 one optional parameter, an output schema, and annotations covering destructiveness, this short description supplies everything needed to call the tool correctly. The only nuance, path optionality, is present and consistent.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description largely restates the path parameter's optionality rather than adding new meaning. The phrasing 'after the first save' adds marginal context, but the schema already documents the same behavior.

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?

States a specific verb ('save'), resource ('the project'), and file format (.newera), making it unambiguous among siblings like open_home/new_home/get_home. The optional-path clarification adds precision without diluting the main action.

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?

Provides clear context on when a path is needed (first save vs. subsequent saves), which directly guides invocation. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but 'save' is sufficiently distinct that an exclusion is not necessary.

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