teamleader_projects_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and filters, omitting pagination behavior, default page sizes, sorting, or output structure. This is a read-only operation, but the lack of pagination details is a notable gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No wasted words; it effectively communicates the core purpose in minimal space.

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 list tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It doesn't mention pagination, return value structure, or that results are likely a list of project objects. The schema hints at pagination via page/page_size, but the description could be more complete for an agent to fully understand expected results.

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 description mentions 'search term or status', mapping to the term and status parameters and indicating they are optional. However, it doesn't add meaning for page and page_size beyond the schema, and the schema already covers 75% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds marginal value.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('nextgen projects'), with optional filters. It distinguishes itself from sibling project tools like teamleader_projects_info and teamleader_projects_create by being the list operation.

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 implies this tool is for listing projects with optional filters, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like teamleader_projects_info or provide exclusions. It gives basic context but no explicit guidance on alternative selection.

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