list_claude_projects

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

The description discloses the data source (`~/.claude/projects/` or `CLAUDE_DIR`) and the sorting order. With no annotations, it carries full burden for transparency. Missing details on error handling (e.g., missing directory) and permissions, but adequate for a simple read 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?

Three sentences covering purpose, source, and output details with no fluff. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 an output schema, the description is complete: it specifies the operation, data source, and return fields with sorting. No major gaps.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description adds value by explaining the data source and return fields, providing context beyond the empty schema.

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 tool lists Claude Code projects, with specifics on what is returned (slug, session count, last activity timestamp) and sorting order. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_claude_sessions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_claude_sessions). The description implies it is a read operation but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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