vk_put_projects_9c800bbf1cb8

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that authentication is required and that creating under a parent project requires write access. It does not describe the response format, whether the operation is idempotent, or that it is a raw REST proxy requiring a body parameter, which is mentioned.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary action. However, the phrase 'Creates a new project' is repeated twice, wasting a sentence that could have been used for more useful guidance.

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 there is no output schema, the tool is a simple create proxy, and the description covers the core behavior, auth, and payload format. It lacks details on response bodies and specific parameters but is reasonably complete for a proxy tool.

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 coverage is 100% with a single 'body' parameter described as 'The project you want to create.' The description adds that the body is a JSON request payload and that path/query parameters are top-level fields with aliases. That's useful beyond the schema, though it doesn't enumerate possible project fields.

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 creates a new project and is a raw Vikunja REST proxy for PUT /projects. However, it does not differentiate among the many sibling vk_put_projects_* variants, which all appear to target the same endpoint.

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?

It says authentication is required and mentions write-access needs for parent projects, giving some usage context. However, it does not explain when to use this raw proxy versus the more semantic vikunja_create_project or vikunja_update_project siblings, nor does it mention alternatives.

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