get_project

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

With no annotations, description should disclose behavioral traits. Only states 'Returns: Project details' without mentioning any side effects, read-only nature, authentication needs, or response structure.

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?

Short and structured with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. However, the docstring formatting is somewhat redundant for a single-param tool; could be even more concise.

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 an output schema exists, description doesn't need full return details, but 'Project details' is vague. No annotations, and minimal description, but for a simple get tool it meets a baseline.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. Only repeats 'The ID of the project', which adds no value beyond the schema's 'title: Project Id'. No format, examples, or constraints provided.

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?

Clearly states 'Get detailed information about a specific project', with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_projects' which lists all projects, and other tools that operate on different resources.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions provided. Only implies that a project_id is needed, which is already in the schema.

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