cloud_projs_ls

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

No annotations provided; the description does not disclose side effects, permissions, pagination behavior, or what happens with include_deleted. Extra parameters like extra_headers are listed without explanation of impact.

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 includes a main sentence and a parameter list, which is structured but not extremely concise. It could be more front-loaded by prioritizing 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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details on return format, pagination limits, error handling, and how filtering by name works. It does not compensate for the missing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description provides brief explanations for each parameter in the Args block. For limit and offset, it explains their roles. However, extra_headers, extra_query, extra_body are only minimally described.

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 'Retrieve a list of projects for a client', specifying the verb (retrieve) and resource (projects). It mentions filtering and ordering, and distinct from sibling tools like cloud_projs_del, cloud_projs_get, and cloud_projs_new.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or comparison with siblings. The client_id filter is mentioned as for administrators but no further context.

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