yougile_list_projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that the tool returns project names, IDs, and user roles, which is useful context not in the annotations. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior or any other side effects, but with annotations covering the main concerns, this is adequate.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and immediately states the return contents. No wasted words or redundancy.

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, read-only list tool with full parameter schema coverage and clear annotations, the description is sufficient. It mentions return fields, which is helpful since there is no output schema. It does not explicitly mention pagination, but the schema parameters (limit, offset) cover that, so the overall context is complete enough.

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 100%, so all three parameters (limit, title, offset) already have descriptive comments. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, leaving the schema to provide the necessary semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('projects in the YouGile company'), and distinguishes this list operation from sibling tools like get_project by specifying the returned fields (names, IDs, user roles). This is unambiguous and differentiates from other list tools (columns, tasks, 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—use this to list all projects—but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like get_project for a single project, or how to combine with filters. No exclusions or alternative guidance are provided, leaving usage context implicit.

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