project_new

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. While it notes the project is 'empty', it fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: what happens to the current project (is it closed?), whether unsaved changes are lost, or if the operation can fail.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with no waste. Every word earns its place: 'Create' (action), 'new empty' (state), 'Audacity project' (domain).

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool but missing important behavioral context regarding side effects on current project state. With no output schema and no annotations, the description should have addressed what happens to existing work.

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?

Zero parameters exist (schema is empty object). Per guidelines, 0 params warrants baseline score of 4. No parameter semantic information is required or provided.

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 specific verb 'Create' and resource 'Audacity project'. The word 'empty' adds useful scope, implying no initial content/tracks. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'project_open' or 'project_save_as'.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'project_open' (existing projects) or 'project_save_as' (saving current as new). No mention of prerequisites or side effects.

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