mp_listProjects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return structure, confirms no parameters, and warns about what it does not do. It implies a read-only operation (listing), but does not explicitly state side effects or read-only nature. Still, it is very transparent.

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 well-structured, front-loading the return structure and then explaining usage. Every sentence is informative and earns its place. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 no-parameter list tool, the description covers all necessary context: what it returns, how to use it in workflows with sibling tools, and what it does not provide. It is complete given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema.

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 are no parameters, and the description explicitly confirms this, adding value beyond the empty schema. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description meets it.

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 it lists recent projects from WeChat DevTools and specifies the return structure. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mp_ensureConnection and mp_setDefaultProject by explaining how they relate, and notes it does not provide page routes, setting it apart from page-level tools.

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 provides three explicit scenarios for when to use this tool: after mp_ensureConnection prompts for project selection, to fix default connection, or to check available projects. It also clarifies when not to use it (for page routes) and suggests alternatives (mp_ensureConnection, mp_setDefaultProject).

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