project_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the immediate-open behavior, which is a useful behavioral trait, but it doesn't mention side effects like what happens to the current open project or failure behavior if the name already exists (though schema mentions uniqueness). Gaps remain.

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 a single, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and includes only the additional behavior (opens immediately). No filler or 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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear schema, and output schema present), the description is largely complete. The only minor omission is clarifying the effect on any currently open project, but the phrase 'open it immediately' strongly implies it becomes the active project.

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?

There is one parameter (name) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description does not add additional context about the parameter, which matches the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('project'), and adds the distinct behavior 'open it immediately,' which clearly separates it from siblings like project_open (which opens existing projects) and project_import. This is a precise and unambiguous purpose statement.

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?

The description clearly indicates when to use the tool: when creating a new project and wanting it opened immediately. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough given the sibling set and the action-oriented phrasing.

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