autotask_search_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It only discloses pagination behavior and default page size. Missing are read-only nature, rate limits, ordering, or what happens when no parameters are provided. A search tool should clarify if it supports partial matching or requires exact names.

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 sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, no fluff. Every sentence conveys essential information without redundancy.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return values. It does not describe the result format (e.g., list of project IDs, names). For a search tool with 6 parameters and pagination, crucial context like search behavior (e.g., partial match) is missing.

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 83%, and the description adds value by stating default pageSize (25) and suggesting the page parameter for more results. However, it does not elaborate on other parameters (status, companyID, searchTerm) beyond what the schema already describes.

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 it searches for projects in Autotask, which distinguishes it from sibling search tools targeting different entities (e.g., tickets, opportunities). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other project-related tools like autotask_create_project.

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?

The description provides pagination info (25 per page, page parameter) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like autotask_search_opportunities or how to filter effectively. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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