weeek_list_projects

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the returned field set, which substitutes for the missing output schema, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, ordering, or whether all projects or a scoped subset is returned. Adequate but with real gaps.

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?

Two tight sentences: the field list is front-loaded and the sibling routing follows immediately. Every sentence earns its place, and the enumerated fields compensate for the absent output schema rather than wasting space.

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 zero-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema list tool, the description covers the essential return shape and the alternative tool. It stops short of stating scope or pagination behavior, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it is missing.

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?

The schema declares zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. No parameter-level noise or misleading hints are introduced.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List WEEEK projects') and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (id, name, isPrivate, status, portfolioId). It also explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling weeek_get_project, so an agent can choose correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use weeek_get_project when a project's description and team are needed. That gives a clear alternative and the condition selecting it, though there is no explicit when-not-to-use or scope/pagination context for the list itself.

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