Search Projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral details: projects are ranked, not all are fetched, keys are returned uppercase, and an environment variable can filter results. This adds value 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?

The description is well-organized with a header, usage explanation, and structured Args/Returns sections. It is concise but includes some redundancy (e.g., repeating parameter descriptions present in schema). Still efficient and informative.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 params, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, behavioral quirks (uppercase keys, filter), and return type. It does not address error cases or empty query behavior, but is generally complete for this context.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds little beyond what the schema already provides for parameters (e.g., 'query: Name or key prefix' repeats schema). The behavioral notes about uppercase keys and filter are not parameter-specific. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search for Jira projects by name or key prefix' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like jira_get_all_projects by noting it uses a picker endpoint for ranked results without fetching all projects.

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 when to use this tool (searching by name/prefix) versus alternatives (like fetching all projects), but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives. The mention of the JIRA_PROJECTS_FILTER provides additional context.

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