list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of signaling behavior; 'List' and the return-field list indicate a read-only enumeration, and 'optional filters' implies no filters returns all projects. However, it does not clarify how multiple filters combine, default ordering, or pagination, though these are minor for a simple list tool.

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 concise sentences front-load the main action and list the returned fields with no filler. Each sentence earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with fully documented parameters, the description covers the missing output contract by listing return fields, since there is no output schema. It lacks explicit routing to search_projects and filter-combination semantics, but the core calling contract is present.

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 100%, so the input schema fully documents all four parameters. The description adds only the generic phrase 'optional filters' and provides no additional meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), the resource ('projects'), and the returned fields, making the tool's job clear. It is clearly the bulk-listing counterpart to get_project, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from search_projects.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use list_projects versus search_projects or stale_projects. The optional filters imply some use cases, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement.

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