Load Project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., replaces current project), permissions needed, or error conditions. The one sentence is insufficient for a mutation 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 a single sentence, making it concise. It front-loads the action and resource. However, it is too brief given the missing behavioral details, but remains 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?

With no output schema and one parameter, the description should explain the loading behavior (e.g., replaces current project). It does not, and given the many sibling tools, complete context is lacking. Only basic purpose is covered.

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 schema has 0% coverage and no enums. The description adds that the path is for .qgs/.qgz files, which provides context beyond the type 'string'. However, it doesn't clarify absolute vs relative paths or other constraints, so only moderate value.

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 loads a QGIS project, specifies the file format (.qgs/.qgz), and uses a specific verb+resource combination. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_new_project or save_project.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or that it replaces the current project, which is implicit.

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