List Project Status Snapshots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds value by specifying pagination behavior (page and per_page control, response includes pagination metadata) and the API endpoint. No contradictions with annotations.

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 paragraph but effectively front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes necessary details like pagination and API endpoint. Minor redundancy: refers to both 'project status snapshots' and 'Budget records' which could cause slight confusion. Still efficient.

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 list tool without output schema, the description covers input parameters, pagination control, and response metadata. It does not detail the snapshot structure, but the input schema is fully documented. The description is sufficiently complete for the agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 good descriptions for all parameters. The description mentions required parameters and pagination but does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 returns a paginated list of project status snapshots with filtering and sorting. It specifies the use case: 'enumerate Budget records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' This distinguishes it from sibling list tools by naming the specific resource.

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 context on when to use the tool: 'Use this to enumerate Budget records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the purpose is clear. Required parameters are listed, which helps the agent know prerequisites.

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