project_info

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

The description discloses what information is returned but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects. Given no annotations, a more explicit statement would improve transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and efficiently lists the returned information without unnecessary words.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description adequately summarizes the output. It could mention whether the tool always returns all listed fields or if some may be null.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by enumerating the returned fields (file path, title, CRS, etc.), which is not represented in the input schema.

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: to describe the currently open QGIS project, listing specific metadata fields. It distinguishes from action-oriented siblings like project_open and project_save.

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 is for retrieving project metadata but does not explicitly state when to use it over related tools like project_list_layers or layer_info. However, the context is clear.

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