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

The readOnlyHint annotation establishes safety, and the description adds the important prerequisite of organization context. No unexpected side effects or additional behavioral details are omitted.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main action and then provides the necessary context requirement.

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 read-only listing tool, the description and schema provide sufficient context: what is listed, the scope, the prerequisite, and pagination parameters. No output schema is required to understand the basic return behavior.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema with defaults and maximums, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics. The high schema coverage supports the baseline score.

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 tool lists all projects in the active organization, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from sibling tools such as get_project and list_team_projects by scope.

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?

The description explicitly notes that organization context is required and directs the user to call set_context first. It does not explicitly compare with alternative list tools, but the scope is clear enough for typical use.

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