list_projects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only action ('List'), notes the data source is public, and reveals output details (highlights and KiloDock links). This is sufficient for a simple, side-effect-free listing tool.

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?

A single sentence front-loads the action ('List projects') then efficiently adds two pieces of useful context (source location and output highlights). There is no redundancy or filler, and the structure makes the tool easy to scan.

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 tool is simple, accepts no parameters, and has an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the core action, the data source, and distinctive output features, making it complete enough for an agent to invoke 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema already provides 100% coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The description does not need to add parameter-level detail, and the baseline for a no-parameter tool is satisfied.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('projects from public resume.json') and adds meaningful details ('highlights', 'KiloDock links'). It inherently distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_resume_summary and search_evidence, which have different purposes.

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 when to use the tool: whenever the agent needs an overview of projects from the public resume. However, it does not explicitly reference alternatives such as get_resume_summary or search_evidence, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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