build_project_spec

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, consistent with description's analytical nature. Description adds context about fusion and output format but doesn't disclose constraints like data dependencies or processing time.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key detail about output format and role.

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 parameters and presence of output schema, description is adequate but lacks guidance on when to invoke (before recommend_changes) and what the report contains.

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?

No parameters exist, schema coverage 100%. Description provides context about analysis inputs (symbolic+audio) but not necessary since schema is empty. Baseline 4 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?

Description clearly states it fuses symbolic and audio analysis into a CompositionSpec and plain-English report, serving as contract for recommend_changes. Verb 'build' in name plus description gives clear purpose, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like analyze_audio_character.

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?

Implied usage as prerequisite for recommend_changes via 'contract handed to recommend_changes', but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives discussed.

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