create_project

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

The description calls creation 'irreversible/high-impact' yet annotations have destructiveHint=false, creating a direct contradiction. This undermines the agent's ability to trust the metadata.

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, front-loaded sentences cover the essential purpose and key behavioral caveats without fluff.

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?

Adequate for a creation tool with schema coverage, but missing return value details and incomplete behavioral disclosure due to the contradiction. No output schema, so description should ideally give more 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 covers all parameters (100%). Description adds value with 'admin only' and the confirm requirement, but does not significantly elaborate beyond the 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 explicitly states 'Creates a new Jira project' (verb + resource) and includes 'admin only', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_board or create_issue_type.

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?

Provides useful guidance: requires confirm:true and retry with template_key if creation fails. Does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the sibling tools are for different entities so no strong need.

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