project_get_overview

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

Describes it as cheap/lightweight, returns only indices and counts for selection (not full detail). With no annotations, this adequately discloses behavioral traits, though does not explicitly state it is read-only (implied by 'overview').

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?

Three sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose and output; second lists bundled alternatives; third clarifies selection summary scope. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema, description sufficiently explains return values (counts, region list, change_count, selection summary with indices and counts). Complete for an overview tool with this simplicity.

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?

No parameters in input schema (0 params, 100% coverage baseline). Description adds no parameter info, but none needed; baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 tool provides a cheap overview for post-production awareness, listing specific data: counts, region list, change_count, selection summary. Distinguishes from siblings by naming 6 specific tools it replaces (project_get_info, marker_get_all, etc.).

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 tells when to use (for overview/awareness) and when not to (if full detail needed on selection, use selection_get_selected_tracks/items directly). Provides clear alternative guidance.

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