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

Annotations already cover read-only/non-destructive/closed-world, so the bar is lower, and 'Reads names only' adds genuinely new information about result content (no file bodies returned) that isn't in any structured field. Pagination and empty-storage behavior remain unstated.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler, though 'Living Projects' is repeated immediately, which is mild redundancy and slightly muddies the scoping statement.

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 does just enough by noting results are paths and names only. It omits what a 'home' contains and what happens when no storage is connected, which an agent would need to handle failures.

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 is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies.

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 and resource ('List every Living Projects home') plus scope ('in the connected storage, by path'), which clearly distinguishes a discovery/enumeration operation from siblings like read_home and update_home_file. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly.

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?

'List every ... home in the connected storage' implies this is the enumeration step before read_home, and that storage must be connected, but neither the prerequisite nor the alternative is stated. No when-not-to-use guidance.

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