list_project_hierarchy

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

Annotations fully declare safe, read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds only that it shows parent-child relationships, which is minor additional context. No contradictions or extra behavioral details beyond 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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with verb and resource. Highly concise and structurally sound.

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 tool with one optional parameter, the description is largely complete. However, no output schema is provided, and the description does not specify return format (e.g., flat list or hierarchy tree), which would be helpful for an agent.

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?

Schema has 100% coverage with description for rootProjectId. The tool description does not add any information beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in baseline score.

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 'List project hierarchy showing parent-child relationships,' which specifies the verb (list), resource (project hierarchy), and key behavior. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_projects, which likely returns a flat list.

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 implies usage for hierarchy needs but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_projects or get_project. No exclusions or when-not advice is provided.

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