basecamp_get_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get detailed information' without mentioning whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or returns a particular structure. The 'get' verb implies safety, but no explicit transparency is given.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without fluff, which is appropriate for a simple get operation.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema, no annotations). The description is adequate but minimal: it states what the tool does but does not clarify what 'detailed information' includes or how to distinguish this from related project tools. It is a minimum viable description but leaves gaps.

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% for the single parameter 'project_id', which is fully described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'specific project', so it does not enhance parameter understanding beyond the structured 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 uses a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific project'), making the primary purpose obvious. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like basecamp_find_project or basecamp_get_project_dock, but the 'specific project' wording implies single-record retrieval.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as basecamp_list_projects or basecamp_find_project. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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