netlify-project-services-reader

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

The description adds 'read-only' context, which aligns with the annotation readOnlyHint=true, providing no contradiction. However, it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, such as rate limits, authentication needs, or what data is returned. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal value.

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 front-loads the key information: it's a selector for three read operations. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or waste, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity (multiple operations under one parameter) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or how to interpret results. However, with annotations providing read-only safety and the schema detailing operations, it's minimally adequate but leaves gaps for an agent to understand full behavior.

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?

The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides. It lists operation names but doesn't explain parameters like 'siteId' or 'teamSlug'. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate, but since there's effectively 1 parameter (selectSchema) with nested options, the baseline is 3 as the schema handles the structure.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Select and run one of the following Netlify read operations (read-only) get-project, get-projects, get-forms-for-project.' It specifies the verb ('select and run'), resource ('Netlify read operations'), and lists the three specific operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'netlify-project-services-updater' beyond mentioning 'read-only'.

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 implies usage by listing the three operations, suggesting this tool is for reading Netlify project data. It mentions 'read-only' which hints at when to use this versus updater siblings, but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'netlify-team-services-reader' or 'netlify-user-services-reader'. No clear exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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