list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the snapshot scoping adds useful context, but the description does not state permissions, ordering, empty-result behavior, or the shape of returned project entries.

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 definition is a single well-formed sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded. There is no redundant or filler material.

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 simple zero-parameter list tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves the return format unspecified. An agent knows what is listed but not what a returned project record contains or how results are ordered.

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, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameters whose meaning needs to be explained beyond what the empty schema already conveys.

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 states a clear verb (List) and resource (CBM projects) plus a scope (inside this MemoRepo space snapshot). It distinguishes itself reasonably from file-oriented siblings like list_snapshot_files, though it does not explicitly name a sibling or define what a 'CBM project' is.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for enumerating projects within a snapshot. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when not to use it, and no comparison to list_space_repositories or snapshot_index_coverage.

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