List Overleaf projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds result ordering and the shape of each entry, but says nothing about the 30-second cache behavior (only hinted at via the refresh parameter in the schema), pagination, or rate limits.

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?

A single tight sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded; the parenthetical packs ordering and returned fields efficiently. No wasted words, though it trades exhaustiveness for brevity.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming the fields returned and the ordering, which is what an agent needs to consume results. The main gap is the two undescribed boolean filters and no mention of pagination or the cache.

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 67%, leaving includeTrashed and includeArchived undocumented in both schema and description. The description mentions 'tags' only as a returned field, adding no meaning to the tag, query, limit, or refresh parameters.

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?

Specific verb (Lists) plus resource (projects in the Overleaf account) with the ordering semantics (newest first, pinned first) and the fields returned (ids, last update, owner, access level, tags). Nothing in the sibling list (list_files, search, etc.) overlaps, so the agent can select it unambiguously.

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 states what is returned but never says when to reach for this tool versus list_files or search, nor any prerequisite (e.g. requires sign_in) or exclusion. Usage is only inferable from the resource name.

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