List projects (Products)

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses that this is a read-only operation, so the description does not need to repeat that. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema, such as the 'products/projects' synonym and the optional filter, but no additional details like pagination or sorting behavior.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the core function and the key optional behavior. Every word is necessary and there is no fluff.

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 simple list tool with optional filter and read-only annotation, the description is fully adequate. The tool has no output schema, and the description doesn't need to explain return values given the straightforward nature of a list operation.

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 100%, with both 'limit' and 'query' documented. The description's mention of 'optional substring filter' simply mirrors the schema's query parameter description and adds no new semantic information.

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 'List Kiwi TCMS products/projects' uses a specific verb and clear resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools that list other entities like runs, plans, or builds. The optional substring filter is also mentioned, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly states when to use this tool for listing products/projects, and the optional filter guides query formulation. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the resource scope is sufficiently distinct from sibling tools.

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