Create a project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Create a project' without mentioning permissions, uniqueness constraints, side effects, or what the response contains. For a mutable operation, this is a significant gap.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It front-loads the core action and purpose, and the examples add useful context without bloating the text.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description still leaves critical gaps: no parameter details, no mention of return behavior, and no guidance on prerequisites. It is enough to understand the basic action but not enough to invoke correctly with confidence.

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 0%, and the description does not explicitly define the 'name' or 'description' parameters. The examples ('a repo, a course, a certification') loosely hint at what a project name might be, but they do not clarify the parameters' roles or constraints 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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a project to group tasks.' It also provides concrete examples ('a repo, a course, a certification') that illustrate the intended use. This unambiguously distinguishes the tool from siblings like dwt_create_task.

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 implies the usage context by stating that projects group tasks and offering examples, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives such as dwt_create_task or dwt_list_projects. There is no when-not or exclusion guidance.

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