Recall a project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining the return value (Capsule + read-next list) and the error behavior (lists existing projects when nothing matches), which goes beyond the structured 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and value, and every sentence adds useful detail: what it returns, how to query, and side effects/error behavior. No wasted words.

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 simple one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content, query method, and error behavior. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool without ambiguity.

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 provides a 100% description for the single 'project' parameter as 'Project name, id, or trigger word.' The tool description largely repeats this same information ('Query by project name, id, or a trigger word') without adding new details about format, examples, or edge cases, so it does not exceed the schema baseline.

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 that 'recall' returns a project's Capsule summary plus a read-next list, identifying the exact resource and action. It also positions itself as 'the entry point before working on any project,' effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search' and 'list_projects.'

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'before working on any project.' It does not, however, explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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