omnifocus_get_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. 'Get list' makes clear this is a read-style operation, and 'Detected version: standard' adds environment context, but it does not clarify output shape, ordering, pagination, or the precise meaning of 'active.'

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 very short and front-loads the core purpose. The second sentence, 'Detected version: standard,' is compact but its relevance is unexplained, so it does not fully earn 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 read tool, this is minimally adequate: an agent knows it will receive a list of active projects. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description could usefully mention what fields or identifiers are returned and what qualifies a project as 'active.'

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 and the schema already documents an empty properties object with 100% coverage. There is nothing meaningful for the description to add about parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies.

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: 'Get list of active projects from OmniFocus.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like omnifocus_get_tasks and omnifocus_get_config, and the qualifier 'active' adds useful scope.

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 intended use is implied: call this when a list of active OmniFocus projects is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives such as omnifocus_get_tasks, so routing guidance is implicit rather than direct.

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