List projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions optional filtering but does not address pagination behavior, default limit, ordering, rate limits, or what resources are included. The input schema covers limit and offset descriptions, but the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond a redundant note on title filtering.

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 a single, short sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 is a list operation without an output schema, the description should hint at the response structure or pagination. It mentions optional filtering but omits pagination details (limit/offset) and default behavior. The parameter descriptions in the schema partially compensate, but the description itself is incomplete for a full understanding.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'optionally filtered by title', which is already in the schema's title description. No additional meaning or context is provided beyond what the schema already documents.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'projects', and mentions optional filtering by title. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yougile_projects_get or yougile_projects_create by implying a collection operation.

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 when needing to list projects, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool (e.g., for a single project, use yougile_projects_get) or alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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