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

Annotations already declare a safe read (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower, yet the description adds genuinely useful context: it discloses what is NOT returned (full voxel data) and states the required VoxelDraft project-read OAuth scope. That auth/return-shape disclosure goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste, front-loading the core action and resource before the scope qualifier. Every clause 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?

With no output schema, the description partly compensates by noting that project listings exclude full voxel data, and it names the required OAuth scope. For a zero-parameter read tool this is close to complete, though the exact shape of the returned project list is not described.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document and the baseline is 4. The description appropriately adds no parameter detail because none exists.

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 a specific verb (List) and resource (the signed-in user's private VoxelDraft Cloud Projects), which is a distinct resource from the model-oriented siblings. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is distinct from, but the project-level scope is self-evidently different from model create/edit/render operations.

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 phrase 'without returning full voxel data' implies this is the metadata-only listing step before inspecting or loading a project, but it never states when to choose this over load_voxel_project or inspect_voxel_model. Usage is only implied, not explicit.

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