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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the key scope constraint (summaries, not full records) and flags the `_rule` honesty-contract field. However, for a 'list every' tool it says nothing about pagination, result size limits, ordering, or auth, which are the traits an agent most needs here.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then filters, then the sibling routing hint, then the contract note. No sentence is redundant.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must cover return values, and it does state what a summary contains and that the full record lives elsewhere. Pagination/ordering behavior for an unbounded list is the one material omission.

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 0% and the schema declares no enums, so the description compensates meaningfully by enumerating all seven category values. Status is only given as 'e.g. active', leaving its full value set unknown, so it falls short of the full burden.

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?

Specific verb ('List') plus resource ('assessed decentralised AI project') with the exact payload named (dual scores, grades, assessment level). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_project_assessment by stating that this tool returns summaries only.

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 names the alternative ('call get_project_assessment for the full record') and the condition that selects it ('Returns summaries only'). Also frames the two optional filters as optional, so the agent knows it can call with no arguments.

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