Create Project

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive write operation. The description adds behavioral context by stating that the tool creates an automatic status page and initial HTTP URL check, beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the action and effect, followed by usage context. Every sentence is informative and necessary.

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?

The tool has a simple structure (3 parameters, no nested objects, and an output schema exists). The description adequately covers purpose, usage, and behavioral aspects, making it complete for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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%, and the description adds meaningful context for the 'name' and 'url' parameters (e.g., 'Public HTTPS URL to monitor'). The 'description' parameter is covered by the schema. The description adds value beyond the schema definitions.

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 tool creates a StillOnline project with an automatic status page and initial HTTP URL check, specifying the resource (project) and action (create). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like projects.list and projects.delete.

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 clear usage context: 'Call this after deploying a new SaaS app, API, MCP backend, or AI agent health endpoint that needs uptime monitoring.' While it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the context is sufficient for the agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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