List Weeek projects

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/destructive properties. The description adds context about token-visible scope, per-project fields, and the absence of pagination, which goes beyond the annotations and adds valuable behavioral detail.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, including usage and limitations. No redundant information; every sentence contributes meaningfully.

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 zero-parameter list operation with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and limitations. It includes return field details and integration with related tools, leaving no critical gaps.

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?

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description explains 'No filters' which clarifies why the schema is empty and confirms no input is needed, adding meaning beyond the empty schema.

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 the tool's function: 'returns every Weeek project visible to the configured token' and lists per-project fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the 'PRIMARY tool for project discovery' and by referencing use with weeek_list_tasks, making it distinct from weeek_get_project or list tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use when the agent needs a project_id to feed into weeek_list_tasks or to surface the project picker to the user.' It also notes limitations: 'No filters; pagination is not exposed,' providing clear when-not guidance.

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