List Instructions On A Project

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying that the tool returns a paginated JSON array with metadata, includes the endpoint URL, and mentions filtering capability. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent behavior, so the description enriches this with practical details.

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 concise with five sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the action, use cases, return type, pagination control, and endpoint. It is front-loaded with the primary function and avoids unnecessary details.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's input and basic output (paginated JSON array) but lacks details on the output fields of each record. Given no output schema, the agent may need additional context about what fields are returned. The description is sufficient for a simple list tool but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter already described. The description adds minimal extra value by confirming pagination controls and required project_id. With full schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 it lists all Instructions for a specified Project, distinguishing it from siblings like list_instruction_types_on_a_project. It explicitly mentions the resource (Instructions) and the action (list), and connects it to Daily Log records, providing a specific and unique purpose.

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 clear usage scenarios: enumerating Daily Log records for paginated overview, finding IDs, and filtering by query parameters. It instructs on using page and per_page for pagination, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it.

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