Create Project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only says a project is created and does not mention side effects, authorization requirements, idempotency, default behaviors for omitted fields, or what happens if a duplicate name is provided.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately concise, though it mostly restates the tool title and does not contribute any additional contextual value beyond the obvious action.

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 create operation with fully documented parameters and an output schema, the core intent is conveyed sufficiently. However, the lack of usage context and behavioral detail leaves an agent without enough information to confidently select this tool over alternative create operations.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the complete schema coverage makes this acceptable under the 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 the action ('Create') and the resource ('a new project'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling create_chore and create_thing tools. Although minimal, it is precise and unambiguous about what the tool does.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus related tools such as create_chore, create_thing, or update_project. There are no conditions, prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative pointers to help an agent decide when this is the correct choice.

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