init_project

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

Discloses main actions (scaffold directory, gitignore) but lacks detail on edge cases: what if .agent-sim exists? Does it overwrite or error? How does it modify .gitignore? No annotations provided to compensate.

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?

Single sentence with all key points (verb, resource, location, gitignore). No filler, but could briefly mention prerequisite or idempotency without significant bloat.

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?

Covers core purpose and action for a simple tool with one parameter and output schema. Missing details on error handling, idempotency, or prerequisite that project_root is a git repository.

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 has 0% parameter description coverage, so description adds value by indicating 'project_root' is the target repo path. However, no specifics about expected format (absolute/relative) or validation.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Scaffold' and resource '.agent-sim/' with specific files 'config.yaml + smoke scenario', and action 'gitignore it'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which deal with scenarios and runs.

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?

Implied usage as initialization step before other tools, but no explicit guidance on when to use, prerequisites (e.g., git repo), or when not to use (e.g., if already scaffolded).

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