list_projectsRetrieve your JustClip account's recent projects, newest first, to view each project's status, video length, and clip count for quick progress checks.
List the account's recent projects (newest first) with status, length and clip count.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | How many (default 20). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing ordering semantics (newest first) and the shape of each returned row, which matters since there is no output schema. It does not address pagination or whether the list is truncated at the limit.
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?
One sentence, no filler, with the subject (account's projects) and the most decision-relevant detail (newest first) front-loaded. 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?
For a simple read-only list tool with rich annotations and a fully documented parameter, this is nearly complete; it even compensates for the absent output schema by naming the returned fields. Minor gap: no mention of pagination behavior or whether more than the limit exists.
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?
There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains 'limit (default 20)'. The description adds no further meaning about the parameter, so the baseline 3 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 (List) and resource (account's projects) plus scope qualifiers: recency ordering (newest first) and the fields returned (status, length, clip count). No sibling tool overlaps this resource, so an agent can select it on the name and description alone.
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?
Usage is only implied by the phrase 'recent projects' — an agent can infer this is a browse/overview call, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement and no named alternative (e.g., list_clips or project_status) for drilling in. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.