List Projects (Personio)

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

Annotations already provide safety traits (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld). The description adds purpose context but no additional behavioral details like pagination or response format. With annotations, the bar is lower; this is adequate but not enriching.

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 (6 words), which is concise but omits important details. It is front-loaded but could be structured better by including parameter hints or return value info.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what is returned, pagination, or parameter usage, leaving the agent with gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description does not explain the parameters (limit, cursor) at all. An agent gets no guidance on pagination or how to use them, despite them being standard.

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 resource ('time-tracking projects') and its purpose ('for tagging attendance'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with absences, attendances, documents, etc.

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 use when needing to tag attendance, but lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance. No mention of prerequisites or context.

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