bitrix_list_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The noun 'Список' implies a read-only retrieval operation with no side effects, but the description does not state the output shape, whether all accessible projects are returned, or how the optional name filter behaves exactly.

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 concise sentence that states the core purpose and the optional filter without any filler. The essential information is front-loaded and every word contributes value.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core operation adequately. The only meaningful gap is that it does not describe the return format, such as whether the result is a list of project names, objects, or includes IDs.

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 input schema already fully describes the only parameter as a filter by project name, and the description's 'по названию' merely echoes that. With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds no additional meaning about parameter syntax, format, or edge cases.

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 identifies the action (listing), the resource (available Bitrix24 projects), and an optional scope (by name). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list other resources, such as bitrix_list_project_stages or bitrix_list_project_members, and from creation tools like bitrix_create_project.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to call it, what prerequisites exist, or why it should be preferred over related tools such as bitrix_list_tasks or bitrix_list_deals.

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