projects_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is known. The description adds a useful scope detail ('доступные пользователю вебхука') and points to follow-up tools, but it does not disclose any additional behavior such as default ordering, result limits, or relationship type.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler: the first states purpose, and the second gives routing logic. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity and front-loads the core message.

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 output schema, fully documented parameters, and annotations cover the basics, so no return-format explanation is required. The description adds the missing cross-tool context (how to proceed for scrum vs non-scrum) but could still be slightly more explicit about the meaning of 'type'.

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?

Parameter schema coverage is 100%: query, start, and include_closed each have clear descriptions. The description adds no extra parameter-level insight; the mention of 'type=scrum' refers to an output/domain concept rather than a documented input parameter, so 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?

The description begins with a specific action ('Найти' / find) and names the target resources: 'проекты, рабочие группы и скрамы' (projects, workgroups, scrums), scoped to the webhook user. The second sentence further distinguishes it from scrum-specific siblings, so an agent can easily tell this list tool apart.

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?

It explicitly routes: 'Для type=scrum используйте scrum_sprints, sprint_board и scrum_backlog, для остальных — project_board.' This gives concrete conditions for choosing alternatives, which satisfies when/when-not guidance.

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