agentbay_project_onboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the return data but does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has side effects. The instruction to follow directives hints at behavioral output but lacks explicit safety information.

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 sentences effectively communicate purpose and usage. Every sentence is necessary, with no wasted words. The first sentence lists what is returned, and the second provides guidance.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by listing the categories of returned data (project brief, file tree, etc.). This provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what to expect, though specifics on structure are omitted.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter described clearly (agentName, projectId, capabilities). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 it performs one-call onboarding, returning a comprehensive set of project information. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle specific aspects like memory, knowledge, or project files.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Call this first when connecting to a project' and 'Follow the directives in the response.' Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the instruction is clear for its intended context.

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