create_project_parameters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses key behaviors: generation from a template, overrides replacing defaults, conditional file writing, and that content is always returned. It does not mention overwrite behavior or error conditions, but it covers the main side effects.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each providing actionable information without unnecessary words. The description is efficient and easy to parse.

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 the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and lack of annotations, the description covers the core workflow: template selection, overrides, writing to file, and return value. It could mention prerequisites or edge cases in more detail, but overall it is complete enough for the agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains template sourcing, the overrides format with a concrete example, and the output_file conditional. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema property types and titles.

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 'Generate a ProjectParameters.json from a template', identifying the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_project and create_materials by focusing on parameter file generation, and references list_templates for sourcing templates.

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 usage context: use list_templates to find templates, use overrides to customize defaults, and use output_file to write to disk. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the workflow is well implied and the tool's role is clear.

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