load_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool loads a file, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., closing the current project, handling nonexistent files, or clearing unsaved changes). This is adequate for a simple load operation but lacks depth.

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 sentence of 11 words, containing no redundant information. It front-loads the critical information (verb and resource) and is perfectly concise.

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?

For a low-complexity tool with one parameter, the description covers the core purpose and a key constraint (desktop only). It does not address error conditions or behavior when the file is missing, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete.

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?

The input schema already describes the sole parameter 'path' as 'Absolute path to a .bbmodel file.' Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Load', the resource '.bbmodel project file', and the context 'from disk (desktop only)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like new_project or close_project, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 gives clear context by specifying 'from disk (desktop only)', which implies it is for loading an existing local file. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., if the file is already open) or point to alternatives like import_texture. Still, the context is sufficient for basic selection.

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