n8n_create_project

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that a new project is created, without mentioning permissions, uniqueness constraints, default behavior for the optional 'type' parameter, or any side effects. This is thin for a mutating operation.

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?

A single clear sentence with no filler or redundant content. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded, but it does not go beyond the bare statement of purpose, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

For a low-complexity create tool with full schema coverage, an agent can form a valid invocation using the required 'name' parameter. However, the lack of any behavioral or permission context, combined with no output schema, leaves the definition slightly under-specified for confident autonomous 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'name' and 'type' already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Create') and resource ('a new project in n8n'), making its core function immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling project tools like update/delete/list, though it offers no detail about project types or scope beyond the schema.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as n8n_update_project or n8n_delete_project. The intended usage is only implied by the verb 'create' and the tool name; no exclusions or contextual triggers are given.

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