create_xcode_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core creation action but does not mention side effects such as setting the project as active, creating test targets, or filesystem modifications. Important behavioral details like whether existing projects are overwritten or what output is produced are omitted.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly names the action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 (9 parameters) and the absence of annotations or an output schema, the one-sentence description is not sufficient. It fails to explain return behavior, side effects, or how the various optional parameters (like setAsActive or includeTests) affect the outcome, leaving the agent to infer crucial context.

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 all 9 parameters are already documented in the input schema with meaningful descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, which keeps this at the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Creates a new Xcode project') and the mechanism ('using a template'). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_workspace or init_swift_package, which target different artifact types.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without contextualizing it among the many other project, workspace, and package management tools in the sibling list.

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