planview_get_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It communicates a basic read operation but does not mention pagination, result shape, default behavior, auth requirements, or whether filters are required for large datasets. This is a minimal disclosure for a list operation.

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 one short, direct sentence with no filler or unnecessary clauses. It is front-loaded with the core operation and is as concise as possible at this level of detail.

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?

The tool has one nested object parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description must explain enough about expected behavior and return values. It does not clarify what filters are valid, what the returned list contains, or how it differs from sibling tools, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it confidently.

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?

Although schema description coverage is reported as high, the only parameter's schema description is a tautology ('Optional filters to apply') and the tool description merely repeats that filters are optional. Neither source defines what filter keys, operators, or value types are supported, so an agent cannot understand how to populate the parameter.

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 action ('Get a list') and the resource ('projects'), and the plural form helps distinguish it from the singular 'get_project' sibling. However, it does not explicitly address why a caller would choose this over related tools like get_work_items.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only hints that filters are optional, but does not say when filtering is needed, how to structure filters, or when to prefer a sibling tool.

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