codex_list_projects

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

With no annotations, description discloses multiple data sources and the mapping from references to canonical projectId. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or the behavior of the refresh parameter.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loads the main purpose, and includes actionable guidance. No wasted words.

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?

Overall context is good with usage flow, but parameter semantics are missing. Output schema exists but is not described. The complexity of 5 undocumented parameters is not addressed.

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 coverage is 0% and description provides no explanation for any of the 5 parameters (compact, limit, refresh, include_private_details, roots). Despite the requirement to compensate, no parameter details are given.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List', resource 'Codex projects', and data sources (registry, hook history, transcripts, cached state). It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting this is used before preflight/submit to obtain project references.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this before preflight or submit when you need a project reference' and recommends next call to codex_preflight_project_run. Also explains that later tools accept projectId, name, or path.

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