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 burden. It discloses that the data is from the last sync (indicating possible staleness) and that it lists projects, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly mention that it performs no network requests or that results are not guaranteed to be up-to-date beyond the last sync, leaving some behavior unstated.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It lists exactly what is returned (title, ID, last-modified, access level) and adds the crucial scope ('from the last sync') without any wasted words.

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 simple list tool with no params and no output schema, the description fully covers the return fields and the data source. It tells the agent what to expect and the underlying sync context, making it complete for its intended use.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The description adds no parameter-specific information because there are none. Baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools given the schema already covers everything.

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 'List all projects from the last sync' with a specific verb, resource, and scope. It differentiates from sibling tools like sync_projects (which likely syncs data) and find_project (which searches for specific projects) by implying a simple list 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 phrase 'from the last sync' clearly implies that this tool uses locally cached data, not live data, so agents know to sync first if they need current information. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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