list_projects

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

With no annotations present, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'List all available projects' clearly implies a read-only enumeration and scopes the result set to 'all available,' but it does not mention response format, ordering, pagination, or whether 'available' excludes archived projects.

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 description is four words, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 tool, the description is minimally sufficient: an agent can invoke it without ambiguity. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it would be stronger if it noted what fields are returned or clarified the meaning of 'available.'

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 there is no parameter documentation burden. The description's 'all available' reinforces the lack of filtering or required arguments.

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 and resource: 'List all available projects.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_tasks and create_task, so an agent can immediately tell what it does.

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?

No guidance is given about when to call this tool versus alternatives, such as using it to fetch project IDs before create_task or get_task. The intended context is only implied by the tool name.

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