list_projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate its read-only nature. It adds the 'discovered' scope, indicating only discovered projects are returned, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or return structure. This is acceptable given the simple listing 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states exactly what the tool does in minimal words, which is ideal for a trivial no-argument listing operation.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool, the description is nearly sufficient. The only minor gap is the unexplained meaning of 'discovered' and the lack of an output schema, but the operation is simple enough that an agent can infer the expected behavior from the tool name and siblings.

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 and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameters. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; no parameter documentation is needed.

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') and a specific resource ('discovered Freebuff projects'), making its function immediately clear. The qualifier 'discovered' adds scope beyond the tool name, and the resource is distinct from siblings like list_threads and list_project_files.

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 this tool versus alternatives such as list_threads or list_project_files. The description does not mention conditions, exclusions, or contexts that would help an agent choose between sibling tools.

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