list_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It lists optional filtering and pagination but does not clarify defaults, read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or the behavior of combined filters. The absence of details leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 front-loads the core action and resource, then lists key features. Every word is relevant and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

With 6 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the tool is moderately complex. The description does not explain the return format, default pagination, filter interaction, or any side effects. It feels incomplete for an agent to confidently use without additional assumptions.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions searchText, includeDeleted, includeArchived, includeImported, and pagination (pageSize, pageNumber) but does not explain each parameter's semantics, data types, default values, or constraints beyond the schema. The description adds minimal value over the parameter names.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists D-Tools SI projects with optional pagination and filtering by specific criteria. The verb 'list', resource 'projects', and modifiers 'pagination and filtering' provide a specific, unique purpose that distinguishes it from siblings like get_project (single), archive_project, etc.

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 implies usage for listing projects with filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_project or other list tools. No when-not-to-use guidance or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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