get_project

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Return,' implying a read operation. It does not disclose behavior on missing keys, authorization requirements, or any side effects. Minimal transparency.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence, front-loading the action and resource. However, brevity sacrifices necessary detail, earning a high score for conciseness but not for completeness.

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?

With only one parameter and an output schema, the description should provide more context on return format, error handling, or relationship to sibling tools. It lacks sufficient context for reliable tool selection.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description only mentions 'by key' without clarifying what constitutes a key (e.g., name or ID). The parameter name 'project' is uninformative, and no further semantics are added.

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?

States 'Return one configured Fluxion project by key,' clearly specifying the action, resource, and scope (one project). This distinguishes it from sibling 'list_projects' which returns all 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_projects'. While 'one' vs 'list' implies distinction, explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is missing.

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