create_project

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

With no annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: workspaceId auto-assignment to personal workspace, echoing back as 0, and the return of the new project. This adds value beyond the schema, though it does not cover potential side effects or permissions, which are less critical for a create tool.

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 concise, using four short sentences. It is front-loaded with the core action, followed by essential behavioral details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient.

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 and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the return value and a key behavioral quirk. It does not explain hours_per_day or provide usage guidance versus siblings, but it is reasonably complete for a create operation with clear attribute names and defaults in the schema.

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 the description must compensate. It clarifies cost_metric by specifying the exact string values and capitalization, but does not explain name, description, or hours_per_day beyond their schema names. The workspaceId mention is about a response field, not a parameter, so it does not fully cover all parameter semantics.

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 'Create a project' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_work_item or create_milestone by naming the resource directly. The additional details about cost_metric and workspaceId reinforce the specific purpose.

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 provides clear context for use, including the cost_metric format and workspaceId auto-assignment. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the context is sufficient for a create operation that is self-explanatory.

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