wafeq_projects_create

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only and non-idempotent, but the description adds valuable behavior: 'calling twice creates two records' and explains how idempotency_key prevents duplicate retries. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded with the key write signal and endpoint. There is minor redundancy between 'Create project' and 'Endpoint for creating a new project,' but the overall structure is efficient and easy to parse.

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 simple parameters, full schema coverage, and annotations covering write/idempotency hints, the description is largely complete for invoking the tool. It includes the essential non-idempotence warning, though it does not describe the response format or error behavior in the absence of an output 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds no significant parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides; the idempotency_key note slightly reinforces the schema's explanation but is not new information.

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 explicitly states the verb and resource: 'Create project' and 'Endpoint for creating a new project.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling project tools like wafeq_projects_retrieve, wafeq_projects_update, and wafeq_projects_destroy, which operate on existing projects.

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 the tool should be used when creating a new project, and the non-idempotence warning gives important usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as wafeq_projects_update for existing projects.

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