gorelo_list_projects

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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring this a safe read, the description's only added statement is 'newest activity first' – which merely restates the schema defaults (sortBy=updatedOn, sortOrder=desc). It says nothing about pagination limits, result caps, or authorization scope that the annotations and schema don't already cover.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero padding, which is efficient. However, for a tool with 17 filter parameters, that single clause is arguably undersized rather than optimally concise.

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?

Given 17 optional filters, no output schema, and only a readOnly annotation, the description should at least mention pagination behavior, what fields a project summary includes, or scoping rules. It leaves everything beyond 'lists projects' to the schema, which is thin for a tool of this complexity.

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% and each of the 17 parameters carries a meaningful description in the schema (ranges, enum values, rejection behavior, date bound semantics). The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists projects') plus a default ordering ('newest activity first'), so the agent knows exactly what the call returns at a high level. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as gorelo_get_project (single project) or gorelo_list_project_sections, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no note about required permissions or scope, and no mention of how filtered listing relates to the get_* sibling tools. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Lists'.

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