list_modules

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds behavioral details: pagination mechanism (cursor, per_page), ordering, and the difference between active and archived modules. No contradictions with 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?

Concise, well-structured with separate Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, no fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Covers all parameters and return format (paginated envelope with results, total_count, next_cursor, next_page_results). Output schema exists but description summarizes it adequately. With annotations, no gaps.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by providing clear semantics for all 5 parameters: project_id, archived, cursor, per_page, order_by. Each parameter is explained with type and usage notes.

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?

Clearly states 'List modules in a project' – specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., list_work_items, list_cycles) by focusing on modules. The description also clarifies default behavior (active modules) and the use of the archived parameter.

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?

Provides clear context: used to list modules in a project, with options like archived filter and pagination. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and the parameter descriptions guide correct invocation.

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