codex_list_project_chats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as being read-only, pagination behavior, rate limits, or the meaning of 'UI-like titles.' The output schema exists but is not mentioned.

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?

Extremely short, but under-specified. The single sentence lacks necessary details for a tool with 7 parameters. It is not well-structured and fails to front-load important information.

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?

Given the complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions, output schema exists but unmentioned), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to use the parameters, or how it differs from siblings.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation of the seven parameters. Even the required 'project_id' is not described. The phrase 'UI-like titles' hints at some parameter behavior but does not clarify any schema property.

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 lists chats for a project, with a specific mention of UI-like titles. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Chats for a project'), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like codex_list_active_chats.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it, nor does it reference sibling tools like codex_search_chats or codex_get_chat.

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